
JOHN PAUL JONES 

After H miniature painted iiv tlie Countess of Laveii- 
rlalil. at Paris, about ITT'.t. 



THE NAVY OF THE 
AMERICAN REVOLUTION 



a« 



s 



■'f 



The Navy of the 
American Revolutic i 



Its AdministratioqJ' its Policy, and 
its Achievements 



By 

CHARLES OSCAR PAULLIN, Ph. D. 

Sometime Fellow (Elect) in the Johns Hopkins 
University 



CLEVELAND 

THE BURROWS BROTHERS COMPANY 

1906 






LIBRARY Of CONGHESS 
Two Copies Received 

NOV 26 1906 

«, Copyriffht Entry 
K^T/, ^C. ^ffO 
CLASS A XXC^ N 

COPY B. 



Copyright, 190G 

BY 

The Burrows Brothers Company 



tEPUBLICAN PRINTING COMPANY 
CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA 



V. 



PREFACE 

Several narrative accounts of the navy 
of the American Revolution have been 
written. These usually form the intro- 
ductory part of a history of the American 
Navy since 1789. The earliest of these ac- 
counts is that of Thomas Clark, published 
in 1814, and probably the best that of James 
Fenimore Cooper, first printed in 1839. Lat- 
er narratives are rather more popular than 
Cooper's. Many sources of information, 
which were not accessible to the earlier 
writers, and were not much used by the 
later, were drawn upon in the writing of 
this book. Moreover, the information that 
is here presented is of a somewhat different 
sort from that of previous writers; and the 
method of treatment is new. 

This book is written from the point of 
view of the naval administrators; hitherto, 
historians have written from the point of 
view of the naval officers. Their narratives 
treat almost exclusively of the doings at 
sea, the movements of armed vessels, and 
the details of sea fights. They have the 
advantage of dealing primarily with pictur- 
esque, and sometimes dramatic, events. 
Their accounts, however, lack unity, since 



Preface 



they consist of a series of detached incidents. 

In the first place an attempt has been here 
made to restore the naval administrative 
machinery of the Revolution. The center 
of this narrative is the origin, organization, 
and work of naval committees, secretaries 
of marine, navy boards, and naval agents. 
Next, inasmuch as the men who served as 
naval executives administered the laws re- 
lating to naval affairs, and indeed often pre- 
pared these laws before their adoption by 
the legislative authorities, it was thought 
best to give a fairly complete resume of the 
naval legislation of the Revolution. Those 
laws with which the naval administrators 
were chiefly concerned have received most 
attention. The legislation with reference 
to prize courts and privateering has been 
treated more briefly. As the privateers do 
not, properly speaking, form a part of the 
Revolutionary navy, no attempt to write 
their history has been made. In order that 
the subject may be seen in its true relations, 
some statistics and other interesting facts 
concerning this industry have, however, 
been introduced. An account of the State 
Navies is now given for the first time. 

Since naval committees, navy boards, and 
naval agents issued written orders to the 
naval commanders prescribing the time 
place, and manner of their cruises, it has 
seemed logical and proper to consider the 
naval policy of the administrators, and the 



Preface 7 

movements of the armed vessels. So de- 
tailed an account of naval movements, as 
would be given by those writers who pro- 
ceed from the point of view of the doings of 
the naval officers, would obviously not be 
expected in this book. My plan has been to 
describe the various classes of naval move- 
ments, to present the sum total of their re- 
sults, and to give briefly the details of a few 
typical cruises and sea fights. The cruises 
of the American vessels were much alike; 
they were minor affairs, and many of them 
scarcely merit individual treatment. 

It is evident that one who proposes to 
write the history of the navy of the American 
Revolution from the point of view which I 
have described, will not only avoid exces- 
sive detail in respect to individual naval 
achievements, but will be particularly deter- 
mined not to allow their brilliancy or their 
dramatic quality to fix the amount of detail 
with which each shall be narrated. For 
instance, several historians have been in- 
clined to dwell at some length upon the 
brilliant and picturesque achievements of 
John Paul Jones. Sometimes they have de- 
voted more than one-third of their narratives 
of the Continental navy to this hero, un- 
doubtedly the greatest naval officer of the 
Revolution. As a result, the pictures 
which they have presented are somewhat 
distorted, and many brave sea officers have 
had scant justice done their gallant services. 



8 Preface 

An attempt is made in this book to present 
a better balanced narrative, and to make a 
j lister estimate of the work of the Revolu- 
tionary navy. The scope and method of 
treatment adopted by the author has com- 
pelled a certain economy of phrase, precision 
of statement, and sharpness of outline. 

I am very grateful to the many persons 
who have assisted me. Space does not per- 
mit me to thank each of them by name. I 
am under special obligations to the librari- 
ans and officials of the Library of Congress, 
the Library of the Department of the Navy, 
the Bureau of Rolls and Library of the De- 
partment of State, the State Library of Mas- 
sachusetts, the Office of the Massachusetts 
State Archives, the Boston Public Library, 
the Boston Athenaeum, the Library of Har- 
vard University, the State Library of Rhode 
Island, the Rhode Island Historical Society, 
the State Library of Connecticut, the Con- 
necticut Historical Society, the Pennsyl- 
vania Historical Society, the State Library 
of Virginia, the Virginia Historical Society, 
the Office of the Secretary of State of South 
Carolina, the Charleston (South Carolina) 
Public Library, and the Library of the Uni- 
versity of Chicago. Far more than to any 
one else, I am indebted to Professor John 
Franklin Jameson, Director of the Depart- 
ment of Historical Research in the Carnegie 
Institution of Washington. I have had the 
advantage of Professor Jameson's extensive 



Preface 9 

knowledge of bibliography, his fruitful sug- 
gestions as to treatment, and his painstak- 
ing care in reading and criticising my manu- 
script. Parts of the narrative, somewhat 
popularized, have appeared in the Proceed- 
ings of the United States Naval Institute 
and the Sewanee Review. 

C. O. P. 

Washington, D. C. 
March 1, 1906. 



CONTENTS 



THE CONTINENTAL NAVY 

Chapter I. — The Naval Committee. 

The need in 1775 for an army and for a 

navy 31 

Agitation for a navy outside of Con- 
gress 32 

Agitation for a navy in Congress 34 

The first naval legislation 35 

Appointment of the Naval Committee 38 

First work of the Naval Committee. ... 38 

Reconstitution of the Naval Committee 38 
John Adams's description of the Naval 

Committee 39 

The organization and decline of the Na- 
val Committee 40 

Growth in Congress of naval sentiment 41 
Naval legislation under the Naval Com- 
mittee 42 

The procuring of a fleet 51 

The appointment of officers 52 

The first naval expedition 55 

Resume of the work of the Naval Com- 

mittpp eO 



12 Contents 



Chapter II. — The Fleets of Washington and 
Arnold. 

Fitting out of the '' Hannah " 61 

Fitting out of Washington's "Boston 

fleet" 62 

Washington's opinion of his command- 
ers 64 

Services rendered by Washington's 

''Boston fleet" 65 

Broughton and Selman's raid on Prince 

Edward island 66 

The disposition of Washington's prizes 67 

The delay in bringing them to trial. ... 68 
History of the fleet after the evacuation 

of Boston 69 

Washington's " New York fleet " 70 

Beginning of the fleet on lakes Cham- 
plain and George 71 

Its increase in the summer of 1776 72 

The work of Benedict Arnold 73 

The British fleet on the Lakes 76 

The battle of Lake Champlain, October 

11-13, 1776 77 

Results of the naval campaign on the 

Lakes ; 77 

Chapter III. — The Organization of the Ma- 
rine Committee. 

The maritime interests of New England 79 

Naval enterprise in Rhode Island 80 

The naval situation in Congress, 1775-76 81 

The Rhode Island instructions 81 



Contents 



The debate in Congress thereon 82 

Postponement of action on instructions . 83 
Favorable action by Congress, Decem- 
ber 11, 1775 85 

Decision of Congress to build thirteen 

frigates 85 

Appointment of the Marine Committee 86 
The Marine Committee absorbs the Na- 
val Committee 87 

The organization and pay of the Ma- 
rine Committee 87 

Its chairmen 88 

Other valuable members 90 

Naval agents for building the Continent- 
al frigates 90 

Prize agents 93 

Continental agents 95 

Aid rendered the Marine Committee ... 95 

Navy Board at Philadelphia 96 

Navy Board at Boston 97 

Designations of the boards 99 

The organization of the boards 100 

The personnel of the boards 101 

Salaries 102 

Enumeration of the principal agents of 

the Marine Committee 103 

Minor agents 103 

Chapter IV. — The Work of the Navy Boards 
and the Marine Committee. 

Lack of system in the Naval Depart- 
ment of the Revolution 104 

Examples 105 



14 Contents 



Work and duties of the navy boards. . 107 
Men and materials needed in building a 

ship 110 

Provisions needed in fitting out a ship 112 
Division of labor among the naval com- 
missioners 112 

The heavy work of the Boston Board. . 113 
Two-fold duties of the Marine Com- 
mittee 115 

Administrative duties of the Marine 

Committee 116 

Naval uniform 117 

Communications of the Marine Com- 
mittee 118 

Reports of the Marine Committee 120 

Naval legislation under the Marine Com- 
mittee 121 

Naval increases 121 

Naval appointments and promotions. . 123 

Relative rank 125 

Captures and the sharing of prizes 126 

Privateers 127 

Naval pay 128 

Naval pensions 129 

Courts-martial and courts of enquiry. . 131 

Important naval trials 133 

The case of Commodore Esek Hopkins 134 
Provision for the fleet of Count D'Est- 

aing 139 

The Marine Committee as a consular 

bureau 139 



Contents 15 



Chapter V. — The Conditions of the Conti- 
nental Naval Service. 

The recent revolution in navies and nav- 
al conditions 141 

Constancy of the principles of naval 

strategy 143 

Maritime conditions in America in 1775, 

and in 1900 144 

Difficulties in procuring seamen during 

the Revolution 144 

The privateers of the Revolution 147 

State navies 152 

The naval defence of America 153 

Naval stations of the Americans 154 

Naval stations of the British 155 

Comparison of the British and Ameri- 
can navies 156 

Weakness of the American navies 159 

Diffusion of authority in naval admin- 
istration 160 

Chapter VI. — Movements of the Continen- 
tal Fleet under the Marine Committee. 

Work of the fleet of a non-military 

character 161 

Classification of military operations . . . 162 

Primary naval operations 163 

Enumeration of secondary operations. 164 

Defence of American commerce 164 

Cooperation with the army 166 

The striKing of the enemy's lines of 

communication 167 



i6 Contents 



Commerce-destroying 169 

The threatening and attacking of the 

enemy's coasts 173 

A naval plan of Robert Morris 174 

The Marine Committee and its plans. . 176 

Success and failure of the navj; 177 

The navy of the Revolution and of the 

Spanish- American war 179 

Chapter VII. — The Board of Admiralty. 

Defects of the Marine Committee 181 

Criticism of the administration of Cong- 
ress 182 

A new system of Executives 184 

Criticism of the Naval Department by 

Washington and Jay 184 

Establishment of a Board of Admiralty, 

October, 1779 187 

Powers and duties of the Board of Ad- 
miralty 188 

Salaries 189 

Selection of commissioners of Admiralty 190 

Francis Lewis and William Ellery 193 

Congress and the Board of Admiralty . 194 

Work of the Board of Admiralty 195 

Decrease in naval machinery 195 

Reports of the Board of Admiralty 196 

Naval legislation under the Board of 

Admiralty 197 

The granting of naval commissions by 

the states 201 

The American navy and British models 202 

Court of appeals for prize cases 203 



Contents ly 



The fleet under the Board of Admiralty 203 
Embarrassments of the Board of Admi- 
ralty 204 

Success and failure of the fleet 205 

Discontinuance of the Board of Admi- 
ralty 208 

Defects of the Board of Admiralty. . . . 209 

Chapter VIII. — The Secretary of Marine 
and the Agent of Marine. 

The two factions during the Revolution 210 

Supremacy of the ''dispersive schoor\ 211 

The ''concentrative schooF' in 1780. ... 212 

Agitation for administrative reform.. . . 213 
The success of the ''concentrative 

school" 214 

Establishment of the office of Secretary 

of Marine, February, 1781 216 

Duties of the Secretary of Marine 216 

Appointment of McDougall as Secre- 
tary of Marine 217 

Failure to obtain a Secretary of Ma- 
rine... 218 

Robert Morris and the naval business. 218 
Reorganization of the Naval Depart- 
ment 220 

The Agent of Marine 223 

Robert Morris as Agent of Marine 226 

The organization of the Naval Depart- 
ment under Morris 227 

Reports of the Agent of Marine 228 

Naval legislation under the Agent of 

Marine 228 



Contents 



The court-martialing of three seamen. . 230 
Morris and the control of the fleet. . . . 234 

The strength of the navy 235 

Success and failure of the fleet 235 

The cruise of the ^'Alliance/' 1782-1783 236 
The capture of the ''Trumbull" by the 

''Iris" 238 

Attempts of Morris to increase the navy 239 
Morris's views after the treaty of peace 244 
Congress goes out of the naval business 245 

Settling of the naval accounts 245 

Disposing of the naval vessels 247 

Retirement of the Agent of Marine. . . . 250 
The end of the naval business 250 

Chapter IX. — Naval Duties of American 
Representatives in Foreign Countries. 

Mutual interests of the United States 

and France 252 

Duties of the Naval Office at Paris. . . . 252 

Personnel of the Naval Office 254 

Communication with the Naval Office.. 255 

Agents of the Naval Office 256 

Appointment and recommendation of 

officers 257 

Privateers 260 

The purchase and construction of ves- 
sels 261 

The fitting out of vessels 265 

The trial of prize cases 266 

American prisoners 267 

Breaches of neutrality 273 



Contents 19 

Miscellaneous duties 274 

The Naval Office a channel of naval in- 
telligence 276 

Naval plans of the Naval Office 276 

Plan of the Committee of Foreign Af- 
fairs 278 

Chapter X. — Naval Duties of American 

Representatives in Foreign Countries. 

Continued. 

Work of the Naval Office in 1777 281 

Attempts to obtain the freedom of 
French ports 282 

The first prizes of the ''Reprisal". ... 283 

Difficulties between the English and the 
French governments 284 

The American Commissioners and the 
French government 285 

The cruise of the ''Reprisal," February, 
1777 286 

The cruise of Conyngham in the "Sur- 
prise" 287 

The cruise of the "Reprisal," "Lexing- 
ton," and "Dolphin" 287 

Strained relations between the Commis- 
sioners and the French Court 289 

The cruise of Conyngham in the "Re- 
venge" 290 

Departure of the "Reprisal" and the 
"Lexington" 291 

Naval movements in 1778 292 

The cruise of Captain Jones in the 
"Ranger" 293 



20 Contents 



The Naval Office at Paris, 1779-1780 . . 294 
John Paul Jones and Peter Landais . . 294 
Plan for an expedition against England 295 
The cruise of Captain Jones in the " Bon 

Homme Richard" ■ 295 

Dispute between Jones and Landais... . 298 

Their departure for America 300 

The trials of Franklin 300 

Work of the Naval Office, 1781-1783. 301 
Thomas Barclay, consul and commis- 
sioner 302 

John Paul Jones, agent for settling ac- 
counts 303 

Naval stations in the West Indies 305 

Duties and work of the commercial 

agent at Martinique 305 

Naval affairs on the Mississippi 307 

Oliver Pollock and Galvez 307 

Pollock and privateers 308 

Pollock and the ''Rebecca" 308 

The ''West Florida" 310 



THE STATE NAVIES 



Chapter XL — The Navy of Massachusetts. 

The state craft 315 

Naval administration in the states. . . . 316 

The problems of naval warfare 317 

Military situation in Massachusetts, 

1775 318 

Action of the Provincial Congress 318 



Contents 21 



Massachusetts seaports ask for naval 

aid 319 

Act establishing privateering and prize 

courts, November 1, 1775 320 

Subsequent naval activities of the Gen- 
eral court, 1775 323 

The fitting out of a fleet, 1776 324 

Naval legislation, 1776 325 

Remodelling of the law of November 1, 

1775 327 

Orders to naval officers — a sample. . . . 328 
Establishment of a Board of War, Oc- 
tober, 1776 329 

Duties of the Board of War 330 

A new naval establishment 333 

Naval rules and regulations 334 

Naval increases, 1777-1779 335 

Launching of the ''Protector" 336 

Naval administration, 1779-1783 337 

Naval increases, 1780-1783 338 

Massachusetts privateers 339 

The cruises of the state fleet 341 

Cooperation of state vessels and priva- 
teers 344 

The engagements of the state vessels — 

a sample 345 

The Penobscot expedition 347 

Losses of the state fleet 352 

The end of the navy 353 

Chapter XII. — The Navy of Connecticut. 

The Revolutionary government of Con- 
necticut 354 



22 Contents 



Fitting out of the ''Minerva" and the 

''Spy" 355 

Failure and discharge of the "Miner- 
va" 357 

The "Defence" and the "OHver Crom- 
well" 358 

The building of three row-galleys . . . , . 360 
Naval duties of the Governor and the 

Council of Safety 360 

Naval agents 361 

New London and Nathaniel Shaw, jr. . 362 

BushnelFs submarine boat 363 

Privateers and prize courts 364 

Naval pensions 366 

Naval rules and regulations 366 

A new naval estabhshment, 1779 366 

Cruises of the navy 367 

Losses of the navy 369 

Warfare of whale-boats on Long Island 
Sound 370 

Chapter XIIL — The Navy of Pennsyl- 
vania. 

Objects of naval enterprise in Pennsyl- 
vania 373 

The fleet of galleys 373 

Rules and regulations 375 

The "Montgomery" 375 

Strength of the navy, August, 1776.. . 376 

Naval uniforms and flag 377 

Organs of naval administration 377 

Commodores of the navy 378 

Naval pay and the sharing of prizes. . 380 



Contents 23 



The Pennsylvania Navy Board 381 

Work of the Navy Board 382 

The navy in 1777 383 

Services rendered by the fleet 383 

The campaign on the Delaware, 1777- 

1778 384 

Trials for desertion 386 

The Navy Board, 1777-1778 387 

The fleet, April- July, 1778. 388 

Sale of the fleet and dismissal of the 

Navy Board 388 

The '^General Greene,^' 1779 390 

Naval legislation 391 

Privateers 392 

Commissioners for the defence of the 

Delaware 393 

The ''Hyder Ally" and "Washington" 394 
The end of the navy 395 

Chapter XIV. — The Navy of Virginia. 

Lord Dunmore's movements in Virgin- 
ia, 1775 396 

Authorization of a navy, December, 

1775 396 

Work of the Committee of Safety 397 

The " Potomac River fleet" 398 

The Virginia Navy Board 398 

Duties of the Navy Board 399 

The location of shipyards 400 

Naval manufactories and magazines. . . 401 

James Maxwell, naval agent 401 

Naval officers 401 

Naval increases, 1776 402 



24 Contents 



Courts of Admiralty 403 

Privateers 405 

The vessels of the Virginia navy 405 

Condition and services of the nav}-, 

1775-1779 407 

Losses of the navy, 1775-1779 408 

The Board of War and the Naval Com- 
missioner 408 

The Commissioner of the Navy 409 

Military situation in the South in 1780 410 

Naval legislation, 1780 411 

The raid of Arnold and PhiUips, 1781. 413 

The navy at Yorktown 415 

Dismissal of the officers, seamen, and 

Commissioner 415 

Virginia's defence of Chesapeake Bay, 

1782-1783 415 

The end of the navy 416 

Chapter XV.— The Navy of South Caro- 
lina. 

First naval enterprises of South Caro- 
lina 418 

Events of September, 1775 419 

The "Defence" 420 

Work of the Provincial Congress, No- 
vember, 1775 420 

Work of the Committee of Safety, De- 
cember, 1775 421 

The mission of Cochran 421 

Naval legislation, February-March, 1776 422 

The Constitution of 1776 423 

Naval legislation, April, 1776 423 



Contents 25 



South Carolina Navy Board . 424 

Work and organization of the Navy 

Board 424 

Naval legislation, 1777-1778 427 

Naval increases, 1776-1779 428 

Privateers ; 429 

Services rendered by the South Caro- 
lina navy, 1776-1779 429 

The "Randolph" and the State fleet. . . 430 
The campaign against Charleston, 1779- 

1780 431 

The navy in 1781 and 1783 434 

Commodore Gillon and the ''South Car- 
olina" 435 

Gillon in Europe 436 

The "South Carolina" in European 

waters 436 

The e:^pedition against the Bahamas. . 438 
The "South Carolina" at Philadelphia. 439 

Capture of the "South Carolina" 439 

Settlement of the Luxembourg claims. . 439 

Chapter XVI. — The Minor Navies of the 
Southern States. 

Organs of naval administration in 

Maryland 441 

Work of the Maryland Provincial Con- 
vention, 1776 441 

Work of the Maryland Committee of 

Safety, 1776 441 

Maryland vessels 442 

Recruiting of the navy 443 

Naval officers -. . 443 



26 Contents 



Court of Admiralty 444 

Maryland privateers 444 

Sale of naval vessels, 1779 444 

Naval conditions, 1779-1783 445 

Acts for the defence of the Chesapeake 445 

Transporting of the Continental army. 446 

British depredations, 1782-1783 446 

Commissioners for the defence of the 

Bay 447 

Services rendered by the Maryland 

navy 448 

The Battle of the Barges 449 

End of the Maryland navy 451 

The navy of North Carolina, December, 

1775-May, 1776 451 

The '^Washington," ^'Pennsylvania 

Farmer," and ''King Tammany".. . . 452 

The defence of Ocracoke Inlet 454 

Services of the "Caswell" 456 

North Carolina admiralty courts and 

privateers 459 

Georgia's first naval enterprise 459 

Naval preparations 460 

Georgia's galleys 460 

Georgia's prize court 462 

Chapter XVII. — The Minor Navies of the 
Northern States. 

British depredations in Rhode Island, 

1775 463 

Naval operations . . . .^ 463 

The "Katy" and "Washington" 464 



Contents 27 



The ''Washington" and ''Spitfire'*- gal- 
leys 465 

Organs of naval administration 466 

Prize court and privateers 467 

An attempted naval increase, 1777 468 

Cooperation of Rhode Island with Con- 
gress, 1778-1779 468 

The "Pigot" and the "Argo'' 469 

The "Rover" 470 

Naval preparations in New York 471 

New York's naval establishment 472 

Washington and the New York vessels 473 

Services of the New York fleet 474 

Additional facts about naval affairs in 

New York 475 

New Hampshire and the Penobscot ex- 
pedition 476 

New Hampshire privateers and prize 

court 476 

Naval suggestions of New Jersey 477 



APPENDICES 

A bibliography 481 

A list of commissioned officers in the 

Continental Navy 506 

A list of commissioned officers in the 

Continental Marine Corps 512 

A list of armed vessels 516 \ 



PART I 
THE CONTINENTAL NAVY 



CHAPTER I 

THE NAVAL COMMITTEE 

The history of the Continental navy cov- 
ers a period of ten years, extending from 
1775 to 1785. During this time the Conti- 
nental Congress made many experiments in 
naval legislation and devised several organs 
of naval administration. The first of these 
organs, with whose origin and work this 
chapter is concerned, was the Naval Com- 
mittee. It lasted for only a few months. Its 
lineal successors, each of which will be duly 
considered, w^ere the Marine Committee, the 
Board of Admiralty, and the Agent of Ma- 
rine. These four executive organs, for the 
most part, administered the Continental 
navy. Certain odds and ends of the naval 
business, however, fell to the commander- 
in-chief of the army and his officers, and to 
the American representatives in foreign 
countries. The second chapter will treat of 
the fleets of the army, and the closing chap- 
ters of the narrative of the Continental navy 
will consider the naval services of our rep- 
resentatives in foreign lands. 

In maritime countries the military service 
is generally ambidextrous. Whether the 



^2 Navy of the American Revolution 

army or navy is first brought into play at 
the opening of a war depends upon various 
circumstances. The presence of a British 
army at Boston, already on colonial soil, 
when the American Revolution broke out 
early in 1775, naturally led to the immediate 
organization of an army by the colonists. 
The need of a navy was at this time not quite 
so insistent. Moreover, the building, or 
even the purchase, of an armed fleet required 
more time than did the raising of an army, 
which was rendered comparatively easy by 
the previous training of the colonists in the 
local militia. Nevertheless, since both 
countries engaged in the war w^ere maritime, 
the creating of a navy could not long be 
delayed. 

The reader recollects that by the middle 
of 1775 the battles of Lexington, Concord, 
and Bunker Hill had been fought, a Conti- 
nental army had been organized, and Wash- 
ington had been made commander-in-chief. 
Outside of Congress the agitation in behalf 
of a Continental navy had begun. That the 
first suggestions and advances for a navy 
should come from New England, where the 
concrete problems of the defence of her ports 
and coasts were being faced, was to be ex- 
pected. One of the first men to make such 
suggestions was Josiah Quincy of Massa- 
chusetts. On July 11, 1775, he wrote to 
John Adams in Philadelphia that the best 
method of securing the coastwise naviga- 



Navy of the American Revolution 33 

tion of the colonies was by row-galleys. He 
then continued: '^As the whole Continent 
is so firmly united, why not a Number of 
Vessels of War be fitted out and judiciously 
stationed, so as to intercept and prevent 
any supplies going to our Enemies ; and con- 
sequently, unless they can make an Impres- 
sion inland, they must leave the Country or 
starve."^ The first formal movement in 
behalf of a Continental navy came from 
Rhode Island, which state w'as during the 
summer of 1775 suffering serious annoyances 
from the British ships. On August 26 her 
legislature instructed the Rhode Island dele- 
gates to the Continental Congress to use 
their influence at the ensuing session of 
Congress to obtain a fleet for the protection 
of the colonies.^ On September 2, 1775, 
Washington, in order to prevent reinforce- 
ments from reaching the enemy at Boston, 
instructed Nicholson Broughton to proceed 
in the schooner ''Hannah" on a cruise 
against the British transports.^ 

1. Manuscript Letters of John Adams, 
lodged with the Massachusetts Historical So- 
ciety by Mr. Charles Francis Adams, who kind- 
ly permitted the writer to see them. 

2. See Chapter III, The Organization of 
the Marine Committee. 

3. See Chapter II, The Fleets of Washington 
and Arnold. After a thorough investigation 
and study of the sources of the early history 
of the Continental navy, I am compelled to 
reject many of the statements and conclusions 
found in Chapter II, Volume I, of Augustus 



34 Navy of the American Revolution 

That the question of providing a Conti- 
nental navy would come up during the fall 
session of Congress was certain. The argu- 
ments in its behalf, which were made almost 
unanimously later in the session, must have 
been on the lips of several of the members 
when they assembled in Philadelphia in 
September: an army had been organized, 
why not a navy? The situation of the com- 
batants, separated by the great Atlantic 
highway; and their character, one a great 
naval and commercial power, and the other 
with maritime interests by no means incon- 
siderable, would necessarily make the im- 
pending struggle in no small part a naval 
one. America had seacoasts and seaports 
to be defended, a coastwise navigation to 
be secured, and above all commercial and 
diplomatic communications with foreign 
powers to be kept open. These communi- 
cations were a jugular vein, whose severing 
would mean death to the United Colonies. 
The urgent and specific calls for armed 
vessels, which were being made, must be 
met at once. Had not America conven- 
iently at hand materials for ships, and 
abundant men who had the ''habit of the 
sea"? 

In the early months of the session there 
certainly would arise opposition to the new 
military project. The inertia and conserv- 

C. Buell's book, Paul Jones, Founder of the 
American Navy. 



Navy of the American Revolution 35 

atism of some of the members would set 
them against so great an innovation. To 
others the fitting out of a fleet, at a time 
when the length, seriousness, and meaning 
of the war with the motherland were but 
half unveiled, would seem an unwise and 
hasty action. 

The question of procuring a fleet of armed 
vessels was first brought to the attention 
of Congress on October 3, 1775, when the 
Rhode Island members presented their in- 
structions, an account of which will be given 
in a succeeding chapter.^ It is sufficient for 
present purposes to say that until Decem- 
ber the Rhode Island instructions had lit- 
tle other result beyond crystallizing and clar- 
ifying opinion on naval affairs by means of 
the debates which they caused in Congress. 

On October 5 sundry letters from London 
were laid before the Congress and read. 
They conveyed the intelligence of 'Hhe sail- 
ing of two north country built brigs, of no 
force, from England, on the 11th of August 
last, loaded with arms, powder, and other 
stores, for Quebec, without convoy." Con- 
gress at once saw the importance of captur- 
ing these two vessels, in order both to de- 
prive the British of these stores and to ob- 
tain them for the Continental army around 
Boston, which sorely needed all the muni- 
tions of war it could get. A motion was 

1. See Chapter III, The Organization of 
the Marine Committee. 



36 Naz'y of the American Revolution 

therefore made that a committee of three 
be appointed to prepare a plan for inter- 
cepting the two brigs, and that it "proceed 
on this business immediately."^ John Ad- 
ams in his autobiography says that the oppo- 
sition to this motion was "very loud and 
vehement," and included some of his own 
colleagues, and also especially Edward Rut- 
ledge of South Carolina. It seems to have 
been recognized that the carrying of the 
motion would be the initial step in the es- 
tablishment of a Continental navy. Such 
an undertaking its opponents declared, with 
a greater display of rhetoric than judgment, 
was the "most wild, visionary, mad project 
that ever had been imagined. It was an 
infant taking a mad bull by his horns; and 
what was more profound and remote, it 
was said it would ruin the character and cor- 
rupt the morals of all our seamen. It would 
make them selfish, piratical, mercenary, 
bent wholly upon plunder, etc., etc." The 
friends of the motion, in colors equally glow- 
ing, set forth "the great advantages of dis- 
tressing the enemy, supplying ourselves, and 
beginning a system of maritime and naval 
operations." On the taking of the vote the 
motion passed in the affirmative; and ac- 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 5, 1775. Waite, H. E., Origin of Ameri- 
can Navy, 1-5, containing letters of John 
Adams, Elbridge Gerry, and John Langdon, 
written in 1813. 



A^avy of the American Revolution 37 

cording to John Adams's recollection, he, 
John Langdon of New Hampshire, and 
Silas Deane of Connecticut, 'Hhree members 
who had expressed much zeal in favor of 
the motion," composed the committee.^ 

A little later on the same day this com- 
mittee reported; and thereupon Congress 
decided to write a letter to Washington di- 
recting him to obtain from the Council of 
Massachusetts two of that state's cruisers, 
and to despatch them on the errand of inter- 
cepting the two supply ships. It also di- 
rected that letters be written to the gov- 
ernors of Connecticut and Rhode Island ask- 
ing for the loan of some of their armed 
vessels, which were to be sent on the same 
mission. "The committee appointed to 
prepare a plan for intercepting the two ves- 
sels bound to Canada " made another report 
on the 6th, which was ordered to lie on the 
table "for the perusal of the members."^ 
This report was acted upon on October 13, 
when Congress decided to fit out two armed 
vessels, one of ten and the other of four- 
teen guns, to cruise three months to the 



1. Works of John Adams, III, 7, 8. I have 
accepted the account of this debate as found 
in John Adams's autobiography, although it 
is possible that writing many years after its 
occurrence Adams may have confused it with 
the debate of October 7 on the Rhode Island 
resolutions. — Works of John Adams, I, 1S7. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 6. 1775. 



38 Navy of the American Revolution 

eastward for the purpose of intercepting the 
enemy's transports laden with warhke stores 
and other suppUes. A committee consist- 
ing of Silas Deane, John Langdon, and 
Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina was 
appointed to estimate the expense which 
would be incurred in fitting out the two 
vessels.^ 

In four days this new committee reported 
an estimate, which was unsatisfactory and 
was recommitted.^ When it again reported 
on October 30, two more vessels, one to 
mount not more than twenty and the other 
not more than thirty-six guns, were ordered 
to be prepared for sea, and 'Ho be emploj^ed 
in such manner, for the protection and de- 
fence of the United Colonies, as the Congress 
shall direct." ''It should be noted that the 
two vessels for which provision was now 
made were to engage in the defence of the 
colonies, and not merely in the interception 
of transports, an indication of an advance 
in the naval policy of Congress. '• Four ad- 
ditional members were now added to the 
committee, Stephen Hopkins of Rhode Is- 
land, Joseph Hewes of North Carolina, R. H. 
Lee of Virginia, and John Adams of Massa- 
chusetts.^ This reconstituted committee 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 13, 1775. The armament of the second ves- 
sel was not determined until October 30, 1775. 

2. Ibid., October 17, 1775. 

3. Ibid., October 30, 1775. John Adams, 
in his Notes on Debates for October 30, 1775, 



I 



Navy of the American Revolution 39 

composed of seven members was sometimes 
called "the committee for fitting out armed 
vessels/' occasionally the "Marine Com- 
mittee," but most frequently the "Naval 
Committee." It secured for its use a room 
in a public house in Philadelphia, and in 
order that there should be no conflict be- 
tween its meetings and those of Congress, 
it fixed its hours from six in the evening 
until the close of its business. Its sessions 
were sometimes pleasantly continued, even 
until midnight, by conversational diver- 
sions, marked by a rich flow of soul, history, 
poetry, wine, and Jamaica rum. 

John Adams, who always wrote pungent- 
ly, has left us a lively picture of the Naval 
Committee. His description makes it clear 
that the deliberations of this committee were 
not always marked by that exalted serious- 
liess and impassive dignity, which we too 
"habitually ascribe to the Revolutionary 
Fathers. "The pleasantest part of my la- 
bors for the four years I spent in Congress 
from 1774 to 1778," he said, "was in this 
Naval Committee. Mr. Lee, Mr. Gadsden, 
were sensible men, and very cheerful, but 
Governor Hopkins of Rhode Island, above 

reports George Ross of Pennsylvania as say- 
ing: "We can't get seamen to man four ves- 
sels. We could not get seamen to man our 
boats, our galleys." Adams also tells us that 
three of the Virginia members, Wythe, Nel- 
son, and Lee, were "for fitting out four ships." 
— Works of John Adams, II, 484. 



40 Navy of the American Revolution 

seventy years of age, kept us all alive. Upon 
business, his experience and judgment were 
very useful. But wh^n the business of the 
evening was over, he kept us in conversa- 
tion till eleven, and sometimes twelve o'clock. 
His custom was to drink nothing all day, 
nor till eight o'clock in the evening, and 
then his beverage was Jamaica spirit and 
water. It gave him wit, humor, anecdotes, 
science, and learning. He had read Greek, 
Roman, and British history, and was familiar 
w^ith English poetry, particularly Pope, 
Thomson, and Milton, and the fiov/ of his 
soul made all of his reading our own, and 
seemed to bring to recollection in all of us, 
all we had ever read. I could neither eat 
nor drink in these da5^s. The other gentle- 
men were very temperate. Hopkins never 
drank to excess, but all he drank was im- 
mediately not only converted into wit, 
sense, knowledge, and good humor, but in-* 
spired us with similar qualities."^ 

The active life of the Naval Committee 
lasted from October, 1775, until January, 
1776, during which time it laid the founda- 
tions of the navy. Its chairman in January, 
1776, was Stephen Hopkins; whether he 
was the first to fill this position is not known. 
His knowledge of the business of shipping 
made him particularly useful to the Com- 
mittee.^ The accounts of the Naval Com- 

T Works of John Adams, III, 9, 12. 
2. Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Bi- 
ography, III, 259. 



Navy of the American Revolution 41 

mittee were kept by Joseph Hewes, who 
was settling them with the Board of Treas- 
ury in September, 1776.^ Early in Decem- 
ber, 1775, John Adams returned home, and 
by January only four members of the Com- 
mittee were left to transact its business. 

In October Congress ordered the fitting out 
of four vessels, and appointed the Naval Com- 
mittee, but did nothing more. By the first 
of November the sentiment of Congress was 
setting strongly towards organizing a navy. 
In its debates on the State of Trade during 
the latter half of October the necessity of 
having a navy in order both to defend the 
colonial commerce and to carry on the war 
was generally recognized.^ The members 
from the South were as a rule now lining 
up with those of the North in behalf of a 
naval armament. Events had happened 
and were daily happening in New England 
which were convincing the doubtful mem- 
bers of Congress. As a military necessity 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep- 
tember 19, 1776. 

2. Works of John Adams, II, 469-83. In 
one of these debates, according to Adams, 
George Wythe of Virginia said: "Why should 
not America have a navy? No maritime 
power near the seacoast can be safe without it. 
It is no chimera. The Romans suddenly built 
one in their Carthaginian war. . Why may not 
we lay a foundation for it? We abound with 
firs, iron ore, tar, pitch, turpentine; we have all 
the materials for the construction of a navy." 
— Works of John Adams, II, 479. 



42 Navy of the American Revolution 

for conducting the siege of Boston, and with 
no intention whatever to create a navy, as 
such, Washington had obtained seven small 
cruisers, and either had sent or was sending 
them to sea in pursuit of the enemy's trans- 
ports. The logic of events had forced him, 
on his own responsibility, to create a little 
fleet of his own.^ 

With the passage of each day, the gap 
between the mother-country and her revolt- 
ing subjects widened, and the ieehng be- 
came stronger and more general that an 
irrepressible war, which must be fought to 
a just conclusion, had begun. What in 
October seemed chimerical, might in No- 
vember appear practicable. 

Beginning with November the naval legis- 
lation of Congress moved rapidly. The duty 
of preparing much of it naturally fell to 
the Naval Committee. Its work in large 
part may be found in the Journals of the 
Continental Congress for November and 
December, 1775, and January, 1776. A 
brief summary of the most important Con- 
gressional resolutions for this period will be 
here presented. 

On November 2, 1775, Congress voted 
$100,000 for the work of the Naval Com- 
mittee, and empowered it ''to agree with 
such officers and seamen as are proper to 
man and command" the four vessels already 

1 . See Chapter 1 1 ,;The Fleets of Washington 
and Arnold. 



I 



Navy of the American Revolution 43 

ordered to be prepared for sea. Congress 
also fixed the '^encouragement" of the offi- 
cers and seamen at ''one-half of all ships of 
war made prize of by them, and one-third 
of all transport vessels."^ 

On November 10 the first legislation relat- 
ing to the Marine Corps of the United States 
was passed. Two battalions, which were to 
be called "the first and second battalions of 
American Marines,'' were to be raised, con- 
sisting of one colonel, two lieutenant-colo- 
nels, two majors, and "other officers as usual 
in other regiments." There is some doubt 
whether Congress fully understood the 
duties of marines, for it provided that "no 
persons be appointed to office, or inlisted 
into said Battalions, but such as are good 
seamen, or so acquainted with maritime 
affairs as to be able to serve to advantage 
by sea when required."^ Such a require- 
ment seems to overlook the fact that the 
duties of marines are military in character, 
rather than naval. 

The Naval Committee made what prob- 
ably was its most important report on No- 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, No- 
vember 2, 1775. 

2. Ibid., November 10. Congress first or- 
dered the marines to be raised from the Con- 
tinental army, but on the objecting of Wash- 
ington to such weakening of his forces, they 
were directed to be raised independent of the 
army. — Journals, November 10, 30, 1775; 
Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 225, 274. 



44 Navy of the American Revolution 

vember 23, when it laid before Congress ''a 
draught of rules for the government of the 
American navy, and articles to be signed by 
the officers and men employed in that serv- 
ice." On the 25th and 28th of November, 
these were debated by paragraphs and 
after slight amendment were adopted.^ The 
rules, eight or ten pages in length, are brev- 
ity itself as compared with the present rules 
and regulations of the United States navy, 
which make a book of some six hundred 
pages. More than one-half of the navy's 
first rules are concerned with the feeding, 
care, rights, duties, and punishments of the 
ordinary sailor; while the present rules of the 
American navy in large part apply to officers. 
A few of the provisions of these old rules 
are worthy of notice. The commanders of 
ships of the thirteen united colonies were 
"to take care that divine service be per- 
formed twice a clay on board, and a sermon 
preached on Sundays, unless bad weather 
or other extraordinary accidents prevent." 
Sailors were to be punished for swearing by 
the wearing of a wooden collar, "or some 
other shameful badge of distinction." Sail- 
ors were to be put in irons for drunkenness ; 
w^hile officers guilty of the same offense for- 
feited two days' pay. The extreme punish- 
ment which an officer might inflict on a sea- 
man was "twelve lashes upon his bare back, 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, No- 
vember 23, 25, 28, 1775. 



Navy of the American Revolution 45 

with a cat of nine tails." In case a sailor 
deserved greater punishment, he must be 
tried by a court-martial, which should con- 
sist of ''at least three captains and three 
first lieutenants, with three captains and 
three first lieutenants of marines, if there 
shall be so many of the marines then pres- 
ent, and the eldest captain shall preside." 
A penal code was established. A court-mar- 
tial might inflict death for desertion, mutiny, 
or murder. 

Rations for the sailors were fixed by these 
old rules for each day of the week. Satur- 
day's bill of fare, which consisted of '"'1 lb. 
bread, 1 lb. pork, half pint peas, and four 
ounces cheese," may be taken as a sample 
one. Each seaman was given a half-pint of 
rum a day, with a ''discretionary allowance 
on extra duty, and in time of engagement." 
The following provision, for keeping the eat- 
ables sweet and palatable, is noted: "The 
captain is frequently to order the proper 
officers to inspect the condition of the pro- 
visions, and if the bread proves damp, to 
have it aired upon the quarter deck or poop, 
and also examine the flesh cask, and if any 
of the pickle be leaked out, to have new 
made and put in, and the cask made tight 
and secure." 

The following naval offices were estab- 
lished; the first two only were commis- 
sioned: captain, lieutenant, master, mas- 
ter's mate, boatswain, boatswain's first mate, 



46 Navy of the American Revolution 

boatswain's second mate, gunner, gunner's 
mate, surgeon, surgeon's mate, carpenter, 
carpenter's mate, cooper, captain's clerk, 
steward, and chaplain. Five marine offices 
were established; the highest was that of 
captain. A pay-table was provided, accord- 
ing to which the monthly wage ranged 
'l^'Wi fcm $32 for captains, to $6.67 for able sea- 
men and marines. According to the form of 
a contract of enlistment which accompanied 
the rules, a bounty of $400 was to be deduct- 
ed from the proceeds of prizes and to be 
paid to the commander, in all cases where 
he lost a limb in the engagement, or was in- 
capacitated from earning a livelihood; if 
the commander was killed, an equal sum 
was to be paid to his widow. Minor officers 
under the same circumstances received 
proportionately smaller sums. The man 
who first discovered a vessel that was after- 
wards captured was rewarded with a double 
share of prize money; he who first boarded 
a prize was entitled to a treble share. 
Ten shares of every prize were set aside ''to 
be given to such inferior officers, seamen and 
marines, as shall be adjudged best to deserve 
them by the superior officers." 

These rules, which were in force through- 
out the Revolution, and which were re- 
adopted for the government of the new navy 
under the Constitution,^ were drawn up by 

1. Thomas Clark, Naval History of United 
States, II, 108. 



Navy of the American Revolution 47 

John Adams, and ''examined, discussed, 
and corrected" by the Naval Committee. 
They are an abridgment and adaptation of 
parts of the British naval statutes and regu- 
lations in force in 1775. That part of 
Adams's rules which constitutes the penal 
code of the navy, he obtained from the Nav- 
al Discipline Act passed by the British Par- 
liament in 1749.^ In adapting the British 
code, however, he made it less stringent. 
The British also found it advisable in 1779 
to lessen the severity of their code. The 
rest of Adams's rules are, with verbal 
changes and omissions, chiefly taken from 
the King's Regulations and Admiralty In- 
structions of 1772. An extract from the 
King's regulations followed by the corre- 
sponding one from Adams's rules will illus- 
trate the closeness of the parallelism: ^*No 
Commander shall inflict any punishment 
upon a Seaman, beyond Twelve Lashes upon 
his bare Back with a Cat of Nine Tails, ac- 
cording to the ancient Practice of the Sea."^ 
*'No commander shall inflict any punish- 
ment upon a seaman beyond twelve lashes 
upon his bare back, with a cat of nine tails.'' 

1. Pickering's Statutes, 22, George II, 
chapter 33; title of act, "An act for amending, 
explaining, and reducing into one Act of Par- 
liament, the laws relating to the government 
of his Majesty's ships, vessels, and forces by 
sea." 

2. King's Regulations and Admiralty In- 
structions of 1772. 



48 A'avy of the American Revolution 

An additional example of the influence of 
the British upon the American navy is found 
in the fact that the naval offices as given 
above were already established in the navy 
of the Stuarts, indeed, many of them in the 
navy of EUzabeth. The Americans were 
still British at the time of the Revolution, 
and they intuitively went home, so to speak, 
for the naval models with which they were 
familiar. 

On November 25, 1775, Congress enacted 
some very important naval legislation, which 
in John Adams's opinion was "the true ori- 
gin and foundation of the American navy," 
and in producing which he "had at least as 
great a share as any man liv- 
ing."^ The occasion of this legislation was 
certain recommendations of Washington. 
On October 5 he requested the "determina- 
tion of Congress, as to the property and dis- 
posal of such vessels and cargoes, as are de- 
signed for the supply of the enemy and may 
fall into our hands." On November 8 he 
pointed out the necessity of establishing 
proper admiralty courts. On November 11 

1. Works of John Adams, III, 11. Certain 
words of John Adams in a letter dated, Phila- 
delphia, April 28, 1776, have an interest in this 
connection : "I have vanity enough to take to 
myself a share in the merit of the American 
navy. It was always a measure that my heart 
was much engaged in, and I pursued it for a 
long time against the wind and tide, but at 
last obtained it." — Force, American Archives, 
4th, V, 1111. 



Navy of the American Revolution 49 

he recommended to Congress the estabhsh- 
ment of an admiralty court for the trial of 
prize cases arising from Continental cap- 
tures.^ A report of a committee of seven 
members, which had been appointed on the 
17th to take Washington's request of No- 
vember 8 into consideration, was, on the 
23rd, laid on the table ''for the perusal of the 
members," and was debated and agreed to 
by paragraphs on the 24th and 25th.^ Con- 
gress now took the decisive step of author- 
izing the capture of all British vessels em- 
ployed against the United Colonies, either as 
armed vessels of war, transports, or supply 
ships. Provision for privateering was made 
in part. It was recommended to the legis- 
latures of the several colonies to establish 
courts for the trial of prize cases. In all 
cases appeals to Congress were to be allowed, 
when made in accordance with certain pre- 
scribed rules. Prosecutions in prize cases 
must commence in the court of that colony 
in which the capture was made, but if the 
capture took place on the open sea the cap- 
tor had the privilege of selecting the most 
convenient court. Congress fixed the shares 
of the proceeds of prizes. In the case of 

1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 165, 
203-04, ,213-14; Washington to President of 
Congress, October 5, November 8, 11, 1775. 
See Chapter II, page 67. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, No- 
vember 17, 23, 24, and 25. The Journals for 
November 25 contain the resolutions. 



50 Navy of the American Revolution 

privateers the whole of the proceeds of 
captures went to the captors. In the case 
of vessels fitted out by a colony, or by Con- 
gress, two-thirds were to go in the first in- 
stance to the colony, and in the second, to 
Congress; and one-third was to go to the cap- 
tors : provided that, if the prize should be a 
vessel of war, the captor's share should be 
increased to one-half, and the govern- 
ment's share correspondingly decreased. 

On December 2, 1775, Congress authorized 
the Naval Committee to employ two addi- 
tional vessels, and also to ''prepare a proper 
commission for the captains or commanders 
of the ships of war in the service of the 
United Colonies."^ On the report of the 
committee on recaptures. Congress on De- 
cember 5 fixed the compensation of recap- 
tors, which varied from one-eighth to the 
whole of the value of the vessel and cargo, 
depending on the time which elapsed be- 
tween the capture and recapture.^ On De- 
cember 9 the following new naval offices 
were established: midshipman, armorer, 
sailmaker, yeoman, quarter-master, quarter- 
gunner, cook, and coxswain.^ On Decem- 
ber 13 the wages of able-bodied seamen 
were raised to $8 a month; and on the 22nd 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 2, 1775. 

2. Ibid., December 5, 1775. This legisla- 
tion refers to American vessels captured by 
the British and recaptured by the Americans. 

3. Ibid., December 9, 1775. 



Navy of the American Revolution 51 

the salary of the commander-in-chief of 
the navy was fixed at $125 a month. ^ 

In accordance with the direction of Con- 
gress, the Naval Committee, on January 6, 
1776, reported on the division of the cap- 
tor^s share of prizes, among officers, seamen, 
and marines; whereupon. Congress divided 
the captor's share into twenty parts, and al- 
lotted them equitably between the officers 
and men. The commander-in-chief re- 
ceived one-twentieth, and the captains of 
the fleet making the capture, two-twenti- 
eths. After the officers had been provided 
for, the remaining eight and one-half parts 
were allotted to the seamen, ''share and 
share alike. "^ 

Meanwhile, the Naval Committee had 
been busy purchasing, fitting for sea, and 
officering a fleet. About the first of Novem- 
ber John Adams was writing from Philadel- 
phia to James Warren in Massachusetts, 
inquiring whether naval vessels might be 
purchased or built in Massachusetts, and 
whether suitable officers could be procured 
there; and also at the same time to Samuel 
Chase in Baltimore, in regard to the pur- 
chase of certain vessels in that city.^ On 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 13 and 22, 1775. 

2. Ibid., January 6, 1776. 

3. Manuscript letters of John Adams, Mas- 
sachusetts Historical Society; Warren to Ad- 
ams, November 14, 1775; Chase to Adams, 
November 16 and 25, 1775. 



52 Navy of the American Revolution 

November 17 the Committee ordered Silas 
Deane to go to New York and to pm'chase 
a 20-gun ship and a 10-gun Bermiidan-built 
sloop.^ Under the authorizations of Con- 
gress of October 13 and October 30, the Na- 
val Committee purchased four vessels, the 
^'Alfred," '^Columbus,'' ^'Cabot,'' and ''An- 
drew Doria;" named, respectively, for the 
founder of the English naA^y, the discoverer 
of America, the first English explorer of 
America, and the great Genoese Admiral.^ 
The first vessel to be bought was the "Al- 
fred," a ship of two hundred tons burden. 
The "Alfred" was originally the "Black 
Prince," and belonged to John Nixon, the 
well-known Philadelphia merchant of Rev- 
olutionary times. ^ 

On November 5 the Naval Committee ap- 
pointed Esek Hopkins, of Rhode Island, 
commander-in-chief of the fleet.^ The Com- 
mittee may have created this office as anal- 
ogous to Washington's position in the army. 
It is more probable that the office was bor- 
rowed from the British navy, in which the 

1. Collections of New York Historical So- 
ciety, Deane Papers, I, 91-92. 

2. Works of John Adams, III, 12. 

3. M. I. J. Griffin, Commodore John Barry, 
19; Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, II, 668. In 
December, 177'4, the "Black Prince" belonged 
to Thomas Willing, Robert Morris, Thomas 
Morris, John Wharton, and John Nixon. — Pa. 
Magazine of History and Biographv, October, 
1904, 495. 

4. Edward Field's Esek Hopkins, 78-9. 



Navy of the American Revolution 53 

commander-in-chief was the chief admiral 
of a port or station, who held command over 
all other admirals within his jurisdiction.^ 
The first and only commander-in-chief of 
the American navy was at the time of his ap- 
pointment fifty-seven years of age. He was 
a member of an influential Rhode Island 
family, and a brother of Stephen Hopkins, 
of the Naval Committee. About 1745 Esek 
Hopkins was a sea captain and merchant ad- 
venturer. In the French and Indian War 
he had commanded a privateer.^ At the 
breaking out of the Revolution he received 
the appointment of captain and then of 
brigaclier-general in the Rhode Island forces. 
Deliberate in action and irascible in temper, 
Hopkins was at the same time industrious, 
steadfast, and veracious. The following 
description was written by Henry Knox to 
his wife, probably in April, 1776: ''I have 
been on board Admiral Hopkins' ship, and 
in company with his gallant son, who was 
wounded in the engagement with the 'Glas- 
gow.' The admiral is an antiquated figure. 
He brought to my mind Van Tromp, the 
famous Dutch admiral. Though antiqua- 
ted in figure, he is shrewd and sensible. 
I, whom you think not a little enthusiastic, 
should have taken him for an angel, only 

1. British Marine Encyclopedia, in Hogg's 
Naval Magazine for 1801. 

2. Edward Field, State of Rhode Island 
and Providence Plantations, II, 422. 



54 Navy of the American Revolution 

he swore now and then."^ The choice of 
Hopkins as head of the navy was, at the 
time, as promising as could have been made. 
On December 7, 1775, a commission was 
given to John Paul Jones, an energetic and 
capable young man, twenty-eight years old, 
whose brilliant career was still unforeseen.^ 
On December 22 the Naval Committee laid 
before Congress a ''list of the officers by 
them appointed."^ It included, besides 
Hopkins and Jones, the names of four cap- 
tains, four first-lieutenants, five second-lieu- 
tenants, and three third-lieutenants. The 
little roll of captains was headed by Dudley 
Saltonstall, who owed his appointment to 
his brother-in-law, Silas Deane, a member 
of the Committee; and was ended by John 
Burroughs Hopkins, a son of the comman- 
der-in-chief. Immediately above J. B. Hop- 
kins in rank was Nicholas Biddle, a young 
Philadelphian, twenty-five years old, and 
very promising material for a naval officer. 
He had entered the British navy in 1770, 
and had served as midshipman on board the 
same vessel with Lord Nelson. In the sum- 
mer of 1775 he was appointed commander 
of the ''Frankhn" galley of the Pennsyl- 
vania navy. The fourth captain was Abra- 

1. Edward Field's Esek Hopkins, 134, 
quotes from Drake's Life of Knox. 

2. Sands, Life and Correspondence of John 
Paul Jones, 32. 

3. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 22, 1775. 



Navy of the American Revolution 55 

ham Whipple, the commodore of the Rhode 
Island navy. 

In these first appointments of the Com- 
mittee it takes no eagle eye to discern the 
workings of nepotism and sectional influ- 
ences. Of the five largest naval plums, 
New England plucked four. This may have 
been, however, right enough, as the South 
was credited with the commander-in-chief 
of the army, and New England greatly ex- 
ceeded the Middle and Southern states in 
the number of men who were experienced 
in maritime affairs. 

In December, 1775, the Naval Committee 
was preparing a fleet for sea, which was to 
make the flrst naval essay of the new govern- 
ment. The Pennsylvania Committee of 
Safety was contributing arms, ammunition, 
and sailors. Commodore Hopkins enlisted 
for the service of his fleet more than one hun- 
dred seamen in Rhode Island, whom Whip- 
ple brought to Philadelphia in the ''Katy." 
On December 3, 1775, John Paul Jones 
hoisted the Continental flag on board the 
"Alfred," Hopkins's flagship, the first Conti- ^ 
nental vessel to fly the colors of the new na- - 
tion.^ By the end of January, 1776, the 
Committee had added four other small ves- 
sels to the navy, the sloops ' 'Providence, " 
and ''Hornet/' and the schooners, "Wasp," 

1. Force, American Archives, 4th, IV, 360; 
letter to Earl of Dartmouth, dated Maryland, 
Dec. 20, 1775. 



56 Navy of the American Revolution 

and 'T]y."i The 'Trovidence'' had been 
the ''Katy" of the Rhode Island navy. The 
* 'Hornet'' and the "Wasp" were obtained in 
Baltimore. 

On January 5, 1776, the Naval Committee 
issued sailing orders to the commander-in- 
chief. He was ordered, ''if Winds and 
Weather possibly admit of it, to proceed di- 
rectly for Chesapeake Bay in Virginia.'' 
Here he was to strike the enemy's fleet 
under Lord Dunmore, unless it was found 
to be greatly superior to his own. If he was 
so fortunate as to execute this business suc- 
cessfully, he was to continue southward and 
master the British forces off the coast of the 
Carolinas, and from thence he was to sail 
northward directly to Rhode Island and "at- 
tack, take, and destroy all the enemy's na- 
val force that you may find there. "^ This 
program seems rather ambitious, when one 
considers the motley assemblage of officers, 
seamen, and cruisers, that composed this 
fleet of made-over merchantmen. 

The ice in the Delaware greatly delayed 
the expedition. Early in February, 1776, 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 2, 1775, January 9 and 16, 1776. The 
Naval Committee spent $134,333 on the eight 
vessels which they fitted out. — Journals of 
Continental Congress, September 19, 1776. 

2. Records and Papers of Continental 
Congress, 78, III, 239-40, orders of Commo- 
dore Hopkins, signed by four members of the 
Naval Committee. 



Navy of the American Revolution 57 

the fleet was assembling at Cape Henlopen. 
It then consisted of the flagship ''Alfred/' 
24, Captain Dudley Saltonstall; the ship 
" Columbus/' 20; Captain Abraham Whipple ; 
the brigs "Andrew Doria/' 14, Captain Nich- 
olas Biddle, and ''Cabot/' 14, Captain J. B. 
Hopkins; the sloop "Providence," 12; and 
the schooner "Fly," 8. On February 15 
the sloop "Hornet," 10, and the schooner 
"Wasp," 8, joined the fleet from Balti- 
more/ On the 17th the fleet sailed outside 
the Capes into the broad Atlantic. A new 
nation in whose veins flowed the blood of a 
long line of seafaring and sea-fighting an- 
cestors was about to put to the initial test 
its skill in naval warfare, and under condi- 
tions far from auspicious. If the doughty 
Admiral should get all his queer craft once 
more into a safe harbor he would be doing 
well. 

Hopkins had apparently concluded that 
his Armada might prove vincible on the 
stormy coasts of Virginia. Indeed, the 
enemy must have heard of his intended 
coming, and awaited it. Not only discre- 
tion, but good military judgment advised 
him to abandon for the present the visitation 
to the Chesapeake.^ Before sailing on Feb- 

1. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 823. 

2. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 
299-300, 319. Washington wrote on January 
4, 1776, to Joseph Reed: "I fear your fleet 
has been so long in fitting, and the destination 
of it so well known, that the end will be de- 



58 Navy of the American Revolution 

ruary 17 he had determined to make a de- 
scent on Nassau, New Providence, and ac- 
cordingly he gave orders to his captains 
and commanders to keep in company, if 
possible, but if not, to make for the island 
of Abaco, one of the Bahamas, where the 
fleet would next rendezvous.^ 

On the 3rd and 4th of March Nassau was 
taken after a slight resistance and without 
bloodshed, by a landing party consisting of 
two hundred marines under one of their 
officers. Captain Samuel Nichols, and fifty 
sailors under Lieutenant Weaver of the 
"Cabot." Eighty-eight cannon, fifteen mor- 
tars, a large quantity of shot and shell be- 
sides other munitions of war were captured. 
Since the governor of the island succeeded 
the night before the landing was effected in 
removing the gunpowder to a safe hiding 
place, the expedition failed of its chief ob- 
ject.2 

On March 17, having loaded his vessels 
and a borrowed sloop with the warlike 
stores, Hopkins set sail for Rhode Island, 

feated, if the vessels escape." In July, 1776, 
Dunmore's fleet consisted of more than forty 
vessels, most of which, however, were prob- 
ably unarmed, being occupied by refugee 
Tories.— Maryland Archives, XII, 24-25. 

1. Edward Field's Esek Hopkins, 101 ;acopy 
of Hopkins's orders is given. 

2. Papers of Esek Hopkins, Rhode Island 
Historical Society, an invoice of captured ar- 
ticles. 



Navy of the American Revolution 59 

taking with him as prisoners of war several 
important officials, including the Governor 
and Lieutenant-Governor of New Provi- 
dence. On April 4 the squadron, having 
reached the eastward end of Long Island, 
captured the British schooner "Hawk," 6, 
and the bomb brig "Bolton," 8. At 1 
o'clock on the morning of the 6th the 
"Alfred," "Cabot," "Columbus," "Andrew 
Doria," and "Providence" engaged His 
Majesty's ship "Glasgow," 20, Captain Ty- 
ringham Howe. After a severe fight of 
about three hours, the "Glasgow," was per- 
mitted to escape, leaving her tender wdth 
the Americans.^ The loss of the enemy was 
four; that of the Americans, twenty-four, 
of which number twentv-three were on 
board the "Alfred" and "Cabot," the two 
vessels which bore the brunt of the en- 
counter.^ Each of these vessels had a lieu- 
tenant killed. 

The American commanders in this en- 
gagement exhibited little skill in tactics. 
A fleet permitted a single vessel of the ene- 
m}^ to escape. Something can be said for 
them by way of extenuating circumstances. 
It should also be said that they show^ed no 
lack of spirit. As was natural. Commodore 



1. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 823, 
Hopkins to President of Congress, April, 
1776, giving an account of the expedition. 

2. W. L. Clowes, Royal Navy, IV, 3, 4; 
Connecticut Gazette, April 12, 1776. 



6o Navy of the American Revolution 

Hopkins was made the target for much ad- 
verse criticism. Nations, it is said, are sel- 
dom just under disgrace, imaginary or real. 
The expedition to New Providence was 
the sole naval enterprise made by the Con- 
tinental vessels, while they were under the 
direction of the Naval Committee. Early 
in 1776 this Committee, reduced in mem- 
bership, yielded its control of marine affairs 
to a new committee with a fuller comple- 
ment of members. It scarcely needs to be 
said that the Naval Committee's claim to 
distinction rests not upon its military 
achievements, but upon its work of a civil 
character, whereby it laid the foundations 
of the Revolutionary navy. It acquired, 
the first American fleet, selected its officers; 
and fitted it for sea. It drafted the firsit 
civil and penal code of the navy, and pre- 
pared not a little fundamental naval legis- 
lation. 



CHAPTER II 



THE FLEETS OF WASHINGTON AND 
ARNOLD^ 



The first armed vessels that sailed under 
Continental pay and control were those 
that composed the little fleet fitted out by 
Washington in the ports of Massachusetts 
in the fall of 1775. As these vessels were 
manned by soldiers and were commanded 
by army officers, and were designed to 
weaken the army of the enemy by captur- 
ing his transports carrying supplies and 
troops, Washington was able to derive his 
authority for procuring and fitting out the 
fleet from his commission as commander-in- 
chief of the Continental army. The first 
vessel employed in this service was the 
schooner ''Hannah,'' commanded by Nich- 
olson Broughton, a captain in the army. 
According to his instructions, issued Sep- 
tember 2, 1775, and signed by Washington, 

1. This chapter, which is presented here 
for chronological reasons, is not closely related 
to the main narrative, which will be resumed 
at the beginning of Chapter III. 



62 A^avy of the American Revolution 

Broughton was directed to proceed ''im- 
mediately on a cruise against such 
vessels as may be found on the high 
seas, or elsewhere, bound inwards and 
outwards, to or from Boston, in the 
service of the Ministerial Army, and to take 
and seize all such vessels^ laden with soldiers, 
arms, ammunition, or provisions, for or 
from said Army, or which you shall have 
good reason to suspect are in such service.'' 
One-third of all captured cargoes were to 
be given to officers and crews as an en- 
couragement. The proportions according 
to wdiich the captors' share w^as to be di- 
vided were fixed. The captain was to re- 
ceive six times as much as a private. Prizes 
were to be sent to the "safest and nearest 
port to this camp." Prisoners were to be 
treated with kindness and humanity. 
Broughton was directed to be exceedingly 
careful and frugal with his ammunition, and 
not to waste it in salutes.^ 

Not until a month after the fitting out of 
the "Hannah" did Washington begin to 
add to his naval force. On October 4 he 
appointed Colonel John Glover and Stephen 
Moylan agents to equip two vessels at 
Salem, Marblehead, or Newburyport, and 
they w^ere directed to name suitable men 
for prize agents in the leading ports of Mas- 



1. Force, American Archives, 4th, III, 633- 
34, Instructions to Broughton. 



A^avy of the American Revolution 63 

sachusetts.^ When Washington received 
the letter of Congress of October 5 directing 
him to obtain two vessels from Massachu- 
setts and to send them to the St. Lawrence 
river to intercept two British transports 
bound from London for Quebec, he ordered 
on this service, since Massachusetts at this 
time had no armed vessels, the schooners 
''Lynch," Captain Nicholson Broughton, 
and '^ Franklin," Captain John Selman, 
which had been or were being fitted out by 
Glover and Moylan.^ In October and No- 
vember four other small vessels, the schoon- 
ers ''Lee," ''Harrison," and "Warren," 
and the brigantine "Washington" were 
fitted out and sent cruising against the 
enemy's transports. About the first of 
January, 1776, the schooner "Hancock" 
was added. Washington had the entire 
management of his fleet. Stephen Moylan, 
who was attached to his staff, conducted 
most of the correspondence with the cap- 
tains and naval agents while Washington 
was at Cambridge.^ Agents for fitting out 
the fleet and receiving its prizes were es- 
tablished in Plymouth, Boston, Lynn, 
Salem, Marblehead, Beverly, Newburyport, 

1. Force, American Archives, 4th, III, 946. 

2. See Chapter I ,The Naval Committee, page 
37; Ford, Writings of Washington, IH, 174-5. 

3. Moylan had been for- some months a 
member of Washington's official household 
before he was appointed aide-de-camp in 
March, 1776. 



64 Navy of the American Revolution 

and Portsmouth, N. H. In January, 1776, 
Washington appointed John Manly commo- 
dore of the fleet. The other commanders 
thereby became subject to Manly 's orders. 
With the exception of Manly, Washington 
had a poor opinion of the abilities of his 
commanders. On January 28 he wrote to 
Manly: ''I wish you could inspire the cap- 
tains of the other armed schooners under 
your command Avith some of your activity 
and industry."^ In November, 1775, he 
had written: ''Our rascally privateersmen 
go on at the old rate, mutinying if they can 
not do as they please. Those at Plymouth, 
Beverly, and Portsmouth have done noth- 
ing worth mentioning in the prize way, and 
no account as yet received from those far- 
ther eastward," referring to the ''Lynch" 
and "Franklin," whose commanders he 
feared "would not effect any good pur- 
pose."^ Early in December Washington 
was still more emphatic: "The plague, 
trouble, and vexation I have had with the 
crews of all the armed vessels, are inex- 
pressible. I do beUeve there is not on 
earth a more disorderly set. Every time 
they come into port, we hear of nothing but 
mutinous complaints. Manly's success has 
lately, and but lately, quieted his people. 

1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 382- 
83. 

2. Ibid., 231-32, Washington to Joseph 
Reed, November 20, 1775.- 



Navy of the American Revolution 65 

The crews of the Washington and Harrison 
have actually deserted them; so that I 
have been under the necessity of ordering 
the agent to lay the latter up, and get hands 
for the other on the best terms he could. "^ 
Notwithstanding the Commander-in- 
chief's unfavorable judgment, it must be 
said that his fleet, upon the whole, was 
quite as successful as were other fleets of 
equal size and force during the Revolution. 
The vessels which composed it were small 
and lightly armed. Manly's first vessel, 
the ''Lee," with which he rendered effec- 
tive service, carried fifty men and four 
4-pounders. The brigantine '' Washington " 
was somewhat larger, mounting ten guns. 
Altogether the fleet captured some thirty- 
five prizes.^ The first important capture, 
that of the brigantine ''Nancy," was an ex- 
ceedingly timely one, and was made by 
Manly in the "Lee" on one of the last 
days of November, 1775. Among other 
stores the "Nancy" had on board 2,000 
muskets, 100,000 flints, 30,000 round shot, 
more than 30 tons of musket shot, 11 
mortar beds, and a brass mortar weighing 
10,000 pounds. It would have taken the 

1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 261- 
62, Washington to President of Congress, De- 
cember 4, 1775. 

2. This calculation is made chiefly from 
accounts of the vessels found in Force's Ameri- 
can Archives and Ford's Writings of Wash- 
ington. 



66 Navy of the American Revolution 

Americans eighteen months to have manu- 
factured a Uke quantity of ordnance.^ In 
June, 1776, the fleet, together with the 
'' Defence'' of the Connecticut navy, captured 
four British transports, which had on board 
besides a quantity of supphes upwards of 
three hundred and twenty Scottish troops.^ 
Washington's fleet cruised chiefly off the 
Massachusetts coast. Broughton and Sel- 
man, whom Washington dispatched to the 
river St. Lawrence to intercept the two 
British transports, did not enter the river 
at all. After making several unauthorized 
captures, they turned their attention to the 
island of St. Johns, now Prince Edward 
island. Here they pillaged the defence- 
less inhabitants, and robbed the houses of 
the Governor and Acting-Governor of plate, 
carpets, curtains, mirrors, table linen, and 
wearing apparel. They made prisoners of 
the Acting-Governor and two other leading 
rnen of the island, whose families were left 
in great distress. Washington was highly 
indignant at these unwarranted acts of his 
captains, and at once on their arrival in 
Massachusetts he released their three pris- 



1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 252 
and note; Letters of John Adams, Massachu- 
setts Historical Society, William Tudor to 
John Adams, December 3, 1775. 

2. Boston Gazette, July 6, 1776. 

3. Force, American Archives, 4th, IV, 451- 
52, Memorial of Philip Callbeck and Thomas 



Navy of the American Revolution 6y 

Moved by the need for a proper judicial 
tribunal to try the prize cases arising from 
captures made by his vessels, Washington 
on November 11, 1775, wrote to Congress 
on the subject. He enclosed in his letter 
a copy of the Massachusetts law establish- 
ing admiralty courts, and explained that 
this law did not apply to the captures made 
by Continental vessels. *' Should not a 
court," he asked, ''be established by au- 
thority of Congress, to take cognizance of 
prizes made by the Continental vessels? 
Whatever the mode is, which they are 
pleased to adopt, there is an absolute ne- 
cessity of its being speedily determined on, 
for I can not spare time from military 
affairs to give proper attention to these 
matters.'' As early as October 5 Washing- 
ton had requested the ''determination of 
Congress, as to the property and disposal 
of such vessels and cargoes, as are designed 
for the supply of the enemy, and may fall 
into our hands." On November 8 he called 
the attention of Congress to the same sub- 
ject. On December 4 and December 14 he 
again urged Congress to establish a Conti- 
Wright; Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 
175 and note, 261-62 and note. H. E. Waite, 
Origin of American Navy, 26-28. Report on 
Canadian Archives, 1895, Prince Edward 
Island, 15-16. The number of vessels cap- 
tured by Broughton and Selman on this cruise 
has been given by Elbridge Gerry as ten and 
by Selman as seven. Both figures are prob- 
ably too high. 



68 A^az'v of the American Revolution 

nental prize court.^ Finally, on December 
20 Congress resolved that the several ves- 
sels heretofore carried into Massachusetts 
by the armed vessels in the service of the 
United Colonies should be ''proceeded 
against Jby the rules of the law of nations, 
and libelled in the courts of admiralty 
erected in said colony."^ The method of 
procedure which Congress here established 
was followed throughout the Revolution 
in all prize cases arising from captures made 
by Continental vessels. Congress permitted 
the states to exercise original jurisdiction 
in all Continental prize cases, and reserved 
to itself appellate jurisdiction, so far as it 
had power to do so. 

It is recalled that Congress, on November 
25, 1775, having under consideration the 
report of a committee on Washington's letter 
of November 8, determined the kinds of 
British property which should be subject to 
capture, fixed the shares of prizes, and estab- 
lished certain forms of procedure in the trial 
of prize cases.^ The lack of correspondence 



1. Ford, Writingsof Washington, III, 165, 
203-04, 213-214, 251-58, 274. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 20, 1775. 

3. See Chapter I, The Naval Committee, 
page 48. It would seem that Congress, by its 
resolutions of November 25, intended to give 
colonial courts original jurisdiction in Conti- 
nental prize cases. Washington did not so 
understand these resolutions. See his letter 



Navy of the American Revolution 69 

between these resolutions and the Massa- 
chusetts law of November 1, establishing ad- 
miralty courts, caused long and serious de- 
lays in bringing the Continental prizes to 
trial. Washington, on April 25, 1776, wrote 
from New York: "I have not yet heard, 
that there has been any trial of the prizes 
carried into Massachusetts Bay. This pro- 
crastination is attended with very bad con- 
sequences. Some of the vessels I had fitted 
out are now laid up, the crews being dissat- 
isfied that they cannot get their prize money. 
I have tired the Congress on this subject, 
but the importance of it makes me again 
mention, that, if a summary way of proceed- 
ing is not resolved on, it will be impossible 
to get our vessels manned."^ 

On the evacuation of Boston by the Brit- 
ish in March, 1776, Washington soon re- 
moved his headquarters to New York. He 
left his fleet in charge of General Artemas 
Ward, who reported its movements to him. 
In February, 1777, the Marine Committee 
of Congress ordered the Continental agent 
at Boston to pay off and discharge the fleet.^ 
of December 14, 1775, to the President of Con- 
gress, and his letter of December 26, 1775, to 
R. H. Lee. 

1. Ford, Writings of Washington, III, 404; 
IV, 44, 45._ 

2. Marine Committee Letter Book, Robert 
Morris, Vice-President of the Marine Com- 
mittee, to John Bradford, Continental agent 
at Boston, February 7, 1777. The "Lee," 
Captain Skimmer, was still in the Continental 



yo Navy of the American Revolution 

In March the Marine Committee appointed 
three commissioners to settle the accpunts 
of Washington's prize agents.^ These com- 
missioners had not completed their task in 
April, 1778.2 

In April, 1776, immediately upon Wash- 
ington's arrival in New York, he began to 
equip a fleet similar to the one at Boston. 
He requested from the New York Committee 
of Safety the loan of their state vessels, 
which he wished to use in suppressing illicit 
trade with the enemy. Some disagreement 
arose as to the terms of the loan. Washing- 
ton insisted that if he manned the '^General 
Schuyler," he would expect to appoint her 
officers. In the end, the ''General Schuy- 
ler" was turned over to Washington, and 
the captain of the ''General Putnam" was 
directed to obey his orders.^ Washington 
now obtained from other sources the sloop 
"General Mifflin." These vessels, which 
cruised during the summer of 1776 chiefly in 
the neighborhood of Long Island, and usu- 

service in November, 1777, when the Navy 
Board was ordered to discharge Skimmer, and 
to take the "Lee" into the regular Conti- 
nental navy, if she was adapted for it. — Marine 
Committee Letter Book, Committee to Navy 
Board at Boston, November 22, 1777. 

1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Commit- 
tee to the three Commissioners, March 21, 1777. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, April 
9, 1778. 

3. Journals of New York Committee of 
Safety, April 24, May 10, 1776. 



Navy of the American Revolution yi 

ally with the New York state sloop ''Mont- 
gomery/' captured several British vessels.^ 
In the summer of 1776 Washington was con- 
structing some ''gondolas/' row-galleys, and 
fire-ships, for the defence of the Hudson. 
The galley "Lady Washington/' which was 
manned and completed by the summer of 
1776, was still in service on the Hudson in 
June, 1777.2 

In the significance of their results the ope- 
rations of no other naval armament of the 
Americans during the Revolution compare 
with those of Arnold's fleet on Lake Cham- 
plain in the fall of 1776. On May 31, 1775, 
the Continental Congress desired the New 
York Provincial Congress "to take effectual 
care that a sufficient number of batteaus be 
immediately provided for the lakes. "^ Ma- 
jor-General Schuyler commanded the Conti- 
nental forces in this region, including the 
naval armaments upon the Lakes. These 
last, in September, consisted of a sloop, a 
schooner, two row-galleys, and ten "bat- 



1. The movements of these vessels may be 
followed in Force's American Archives, Ford's 
Writings of Washington, and the Journals of 
the New York Provincial Congress and Com- 
mittee of Safety. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, May 

30, 1776; Force, American Archives, 5th, I, 
1263; Journals of New York Provincial Con- 
gress, June 7, 1777. 

3. Journals of Continental Congress, May 

31, 1775. 



y2 Navy of the American Revolution 

teaus."^ About the first of August the New 
York Provincial Congress sent James Smith 
to Schuyler to take command of the sloop 
''Enterprise.''^ Smith either received or 
gave to himself the title of ''Commodore on 
the Lakes/' He did not long hold this title; 
for in March, 1776, the Continental Congress 
appointed Major William Douglass of New 
York, "Commodore on the Lakes," a place 
for which General Schuyler had recommen- 
ded Captain Jacobus Wynkoop, of the same 
state.^ In April Wynkoop was enlisting 
seamen in New York City.^ In May, since 
Douglass did not enter upon his appoint- 
ment, Schuyler, acting under the orders of 
Congress, put the armed vessels under the 
command of Wynkoop.^ 

About the first of July, 1776, the Ameri- 
can forces were driven out of Canada. They 
retreated southward as far as the forts on 
the Lakes. The holding of Lakes Cham- 
plain and George, which were a strategic 
part of the line of communication between 
Canada and the Hudson, now became a mat- 

1. Force, American Archives, 4th, III, 738. 

2. Ibid., 11, 14. 

3. Journals of Continental Congress, March 
26, 1776; Journals of New York Committee of 
Safety, March 18, 1776. 

4. Journals of New York Committee of 
Safety, April 24, 1776. 

5. Force, American Archives, 5th, I, 1186, 
1277; Journals of New York Provincial Con- 
gress, March 16, 1776; Journals of Continental 
Congress, May 2, 1776. 



Navy of the American Revolution 73 

ter of vital importance. Providing against 
a possible failure in Canada, Congress, Wash- 
ington, and Schuyler had, in May and early 
June, been increasing the effectiveness of 
the naval armament on the Lakes. On 
June 17 Congress ordered Schuyler to build 
*Vith all expedition, as many galleys and 
armed vessels as, in the opinion of himself 
and the general officer to be sent into Can- 
ada, shall be sufficient to make us indis- 
putable masters of the lakes Champlain and 
George.^' A master carpenter, acquainted 
with the construction of the galleys used on 
the Delaware, other carpenters, and models 
of galleys, if required, were to be sent on 
from Philadelphia.^ 

Towards the end of June, Brigadier-Gen- 
eral Benedict Arnold, recognizing the su- 
preme importance of maintaining a naval 
superiority on the Lakes, began to exert an 
influence in naval affairs. Arnold was not 
without marine experience; as a resident of 
New Haven, engaged in the West India 
trade, he had sometimes commanded his 
own ships. On June 25, 1776, he wrote to 
Washington: ''It now appears to me of 
the utmost importance that the Lakes be 
immediately secured by a large number (at 
least twenty or thirty) of gondolas, row- 
galleys, and floating batteries I think 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, May 
22, May 25, June 17, 1776; Ford, Writings of 
Washington, IV, 101. 



74 Navy of the American Revolution 

it absolutely necessary that three hundred 
carpenters be immediately employed/^^ To- 
wards the end of July, General Gates ap- 
pointed Arnold to command the naval 
forces on the Lakes. Wynkoop, who held 
a similar command by virtue of an appoint- 
ment from Congress and Schuyler, refused 
to yield to Arnold. He was thereupon 
arrested by Gates and sent as a prisoner to 
Schuyler.^ 

During July and August, 1776, Skenes- 
borough, at the head of Lake Champlain, 
was the scene of the greatest naval activity. 
Requisitions were made upon Pennsyl- 
vania, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Isl- 
and, and Massachusetts for carpenters. 
Naval stores and munitions of war of all 
sorts, sail-cloth, cordage, anchors, cannon, 
and ammunition were sent to the Lakes 
from the seaboard, especially from New York 
and Connecticut. Seamen were hurried for- 
ward. On August 13 the Governor and 
Council of Safety of Connecticut voted £180 
to Captain Seth Warner of Saybrook to en- 
able him to raise a crew of forty seamen for 
the naval service on the Lakes. These men 
were "to receive a bounty of £6 for inlist- 
ing; and for finding themselves blankets, 
12s; guns, 6s; and cartouch-box and belt 
and knapsack, 2s; and one month's wages 



1. Force, American Archives, 4th, VI, 1 107- 
08. 

2. Ibid.. 5th. I. 1186-87. 



Navy of the American Revolution 75 

being 48s advanced, "according to procla- 
mation/' On August 16 the Governor and 
Council of Safety authorized two other com- 
panies to be raised.^ In September Gates 
understood that two hundred seamen had 
been enlisted in New York city.^ 

On July 24, 1776, Arnold wrote from 
Skenesborough to Gates: "I arrived here 
last evening, and found three gondolas on 
the stocks; two will be completed in five or 
six days, the row galley in eight or ten days. 
Three other gondolas will be set up immedi- 
ately, and may be completed in ten days. 
A company of twenty-seven carpenters from 
Middletown are cutting timber for a row- 
galley, on the Spanish construction, to 
mount six heavy pieces of cannon. One 
hundred carpenters from Pennsylvania and 
Massachusetts will be here this evening. I 
shall employ them on another row-galley. 
In two or three weeks, I think we shall have 
a formidable fleet. No canvass or cordage 
is yet arrived, though much wanted."^ 
Through strenuous exertions the American 
fleet on the Lakes was greatly increased and 
strengthened. By October it consisted of 
one sloop, three schooners, eight ''gondolas,'^ 

1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
500, 503. The rolls of these three Connecticut 
companies, containing eighty-five names, will 
be found in the Connecticut Historical Society 
Collections, VIII, 235-37. 

2. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 186. 

3. Ibid., I, 563. 



76 Navy of the American Revolution 

and four galleys, mounting a total of 94 can- 
non, 2-pounders to 18-pounders. With a 
full complement, the fleet would have car- 
ried 856 men. It probably numbered about 
700 officers and men, such as they were.^ 
Arnold said that he had a '^wretched motley 
crew in the fleet; the marines the refuse of 
every regiment, and the seamen few of 
them ever wet with salt water." Many 
of his seamen and marines were almost 
naked.^ 

During the first days of October the naval 
superiority on the Lakes shifted to the Brit- 
ish. General Sir Guy Carleton, the British 
commander, drawing upon superior naval 
resources, had outbuilt Arnold. Early in 
October Carleton's fleet consisted of one 
ship, two schooners, one ''radeau," one 
large ' 'gondola," twenty gunboats, and four 
armed tenders. Some of these vessels and 
the material for others he had brought from 
the St. Lawrence up the Richelieu. The 
ship ' 'Enterprise," eighteen 12-pounders, 
180 tons burden, whose construction had 
been begun at Quebec, he thus transported 
in pieces. She was set up at St. Johns, on 
the Richelieu, where the British shipyard 
was situated. This vessel in size and arma- 
ment greatly exceeding any one craft of the 
' \. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 1039. 
One galley which was fitting at Ticonderoga is 
not included in the above list. The exact 
number of men in Arnold's fleet is uncertain. 

2. Ibid., 481, 834. 



A'az'y of the American Revolution yy 

Americans. A fleet of transports and ships 
of war in the St. Lawrence furnished Carle- 
ton with seven hundred experienced officers 
and seamen.^ 

The two fleets engaged each other on Lake 
Champlain on October 11, 12, and 13, 1776. 
Ten of the American vessels were captured 
or destroyed. General Waterbury, second 
in command, and 110 prisoners, were cap- 
tured. In killed and wounded Arnold lost 
about eighty men; and the British forty. 
The British w^ere left in command of the 
Lake; the Americans retreated to Ticon- 
deroga.^ 

Although most decisively defeated in the 
battle upon the Lake, Arnold had delayed 
the advance of the British some two or three 
months, while they were obtaining a naval 
superiority. This delay had far-reaching 
consequences. Carleton now found the sea- 
son too late to pursue his advantage, and to 
make, or attempt to make, a juncture with 
Howe to the southward. He therefore soon 
returned to winter quarters at Montreal. 
When Burgoyne, in 1777, repeated the at- 
tempt to penetrate to the Hudson, Howe's 
removal of his army to the Chesapeake in 
his movement against Philadelphia, de- 
prived Burgoyne's army of the support on 

1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 1178- 
79; Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 353-370, Chap- 
ter XXXI, written by Captain A. T. Mahan. 

2. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 1079- 
80; Almon's Remembrancer, 1777, 356. 



78 A^avy of the American Revolution 

the Hudson, which it might have had in the 
fall of 1776. It has been strikingly said, 
by Captain Mahan, that Arnold's and Carle- 
ton's naval campaign on Lake Champlain 
was a ''strife of pigmies for the prize of a 
continent." Although the American flo- 
tilla was wiped out, "never had any force, 
big or small, lived to better purpose, or died 
more gloriously; for it had saved the Lake 
for that year."^ 

1. Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 363, 368. In 
the campaign of Burgoyne, in July, 1777, the 
British destroyed or captured a small Ameri- 
can flotilla at Skenesborough. — Winsor, Nar- 
rative and Critical History, VI, 297. 



CHAPTER III 

THE ORGANIZATION OF THE MARINE 
COMMITTEE 

In the years immediately preceding the 
Revolution the four New England colonies 
were largely engaged in shipbuilding, fish- 
ing, whaling, and commerce. The forests of 
Maine and New Hampshire afforded incom- 
parable oaks and white pines for ships. In- 
deed, not a few of these trees were sealed 
for the use of the Royal Navy, and their high 
quality authenticated, by the mark of the 
^'King's broad arrow." New England's 
hardy dwellers on the seacoast had long en- 
gaged in fishing on the Newfoundland banks, 
or in whaling in many seas, and had bred a 
race of sailors. The Atlantic withheld few 
secrets from the bold Yankee skippers. 
They were equally at home in the coastwise 
navigation, reaching from Nova Scotia to 
Florida, in deep-sea voyages to the mother- 
land or the Continent, in skirting the Guinea 
coast in quest of its dark-skinned trade, or 
in slipping down the trade winds with can- 
vas set for the sunny sugar islands of the 



8o Navy of the American Revolution 

West Indies or the Spanish Main. In 
no other section of the revolting colonies was 
the first formal movement for the building 
of a Continental navy so likely to be made 
as in New England. Here were ships, sail- 
ors, and a knowledge of the sea. 

Certainly not a whit behind the other 
three New England states in nautical inter- 
ests w^as little sea-cleft Rhode Island. In 
the establishing of state navies she had 
moved first, and on June 15, 1775, had put 
two vessels in commission. On the same 
day her Commodore Whipple captured an 
armed tender of the British frigate ''Rose'' — 
the first authorized capture made by the 
Americans at sea during the Revolution.* 
Already her coasts and her trade were being 
annoyed by the enemy. It was then in 
keeping with her maritime character, with 
her forwardness in naval enterprise, and 
with her needs for defence, that her Assem- 
bly should have instructed her two delegates 
to the Continental Congress, on August 26, 
1775, "to use their whole influence, at the 
ensuing Congress, for building at the Conti- 
nental expense, a Fleet of sufficient force for 
the protection of these Colonies, and for em- 
ploying them in such manner and places as 
will most effectually annoy our enemies, 
and contribute to the common defence of 
these Colonies." The Assembly was per- 

1. See Chapter XVII, The Minor Navies of 
the Northern States. 



Navy of the American Revolution 8i 

suaded that an American fleet ''would great- 
ly and essentially conduce to the preser- 
vation of the lives, liberty, and property of 
the good people of these Colonies."^ 

The naval situation in Congress during 
the fall of 1775 and the winter of 1775-76 
should be clearly understood. The debates 
and legislation of Congress concerning naval 
affairs are attached, as it were, to two 
threads. One thread, beginning with the 
appointment of a committee, on October 5, 
1775, to prepare a plan for intercepting two 
British transports, has already been unrav- 
eled. The other, which had its origin in the 
introduction in Congress of the Rhode Island 
instructions, will now be followed. 

The delegates of Rhode Island to the Con- 
gress in the fall of 1775 were two sterling 
patriots, Samuel Ward and Stephen Hop- 
kins. Each had been governor of Rhode Is- 
land, and each had grown old in the public 
service. Once bitter political rivals, they 
were now yoked together in the common 
cause of their state and country. On Oc- 
tober 3, 1775, one of the Rhode Island dele- 
gates, presumably Samuel Ward, laid before 
Congress the instructions of his state in be- 
half of a Continental fleet. On this day the 
consideration of the instructions went over 
imtil the 6th, and on the 6th until the 7th.^ 



1. Force, American Archives, 4th. Ill, 231 ; 
Sparks, American Biography, 2nd, IX, 314-15. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, Goto- 



82 Navy of the American Revolution 

When the Rhode Island instructions came 
up on October 7, a debate ensued, a synop- 
sis of which has been left us by John Adams.^ 
The discussion was participated in by Rob- 
ert Treat Paine, Samuel Adams, and John 
Adams of Massachusetts, John Rutledge 
and Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina, 
Samuel Chase of Maryland, Stephen Hop- 
kins of Rhode Island, Dr. John J. Zubly of 
Georgia, Eliphalet Dyer and Silas Deane of 
Connecticut, and Peyton Randolph of Vir- 
ginia. When the debate took place, the 
consideration of the Rhode Island instruc- 
tions had been postponed until the 16th, 
and the motion before the Congress was to 
appoint a committee ''to consider the whole 
subject." 

The establishing of a navy naturally found 
least favor among the members coming from 
the agricultural South, and most support 
from those of maritime New England. 
Chase, of Maryland, declared, 'Tt is the mad- 
dest idea in the world to think of building 
an American fleet; its latitude is wonderful; 
we should mortgage ihe whole continent." 
He added, however: ''We should provide, 
for gaining intelligence, two swift sailing 
vessels." Zubly, of Georgia, said: "If the 
plans of some gentlemen are to take place, 
an American fleet must be a part of it, ex- 



ber 3, 1775; Force, American Archives 4th, 
HI, 1888-91; Works of John Adams, II, 462. 
1. Works of John Adams, II, 463-4. 



Navy of the American Revolution 83 

travagant as it is/' Gadsden, of South 
Carolina, temperately favored the procur- 
ing of armed vessels, thinking that it was 
'absolutely necessary that some plan of de- 
fence, by . sea, should be adopted/' He 
was opposed to the ''extensiveness of the 
Rhode Island plan," although he thought 
that it should be considered. The friends of 
the navy acted on the defensive. They prob- 
ably realized that their cause might well 
bide its time. Its opponents, to use John 
Adams's phrase, were ''lightly skirmishing." 
In the end the motion was lost, and consider- 
ation of the instructions was deferred until 
the 16th. 

On October 16, and again on November 
16, the Rhode Island instructions were post- 
poned.^ Samuel Ward had hopes for a fa- 
vorable action on the latter day. On No- 
vember 16 he wrote from Philadelphia to 
his brother in Rhode Island: ''Our instruc- 
tion for an American fleet has been long 
upon the table. When it was first present- 
ed, it was looked upon as perfectly chimer-. 
leal ; but gentlemen now consider it in a very 
different light. It is this day to be taken 
into consideration, and I have great hopes 
of carrying it. Dr. Franklin, Colonel Lee, 
the two Adamses, and many others, will sup- 
port it. If it succeeds, I shall remember 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 16, November 16, 1775. 



84 iVaz'v of the American Revolution 

your ideas of our building two of the ships/^^ 
The several postponements of the Rhode 
Island instructions make it clear that Con- 
gress was slow to reach the conclusion that 
the "building of a fleet" was desirable or 
feasible. It was one thing to fit out a few 
small vessels for intercepting British trans- 
ports, and quite another to build a fleet 
of frigates. It is not surprising that under 
the circumstances Congress hesitated to 
embark on the larger undertaking. The 
difference in the presentation to Congress of 
the two propositions, both of which involved 
the procuring of a naval armament, is wor- 
thy of note, for it had its influence on leg- 
islation. The appointment of a committee 
to prepare a plan for intercepting trans- 
ports, put the question in a softened, more 
veiled, and less direct form. It pointed 
the wedge of naval legislation by a tactful 
presentation, and drove it home with an 
exigency. 

In Chapter I the increase of sentiment in 
favor of a naval armament during the latter 
part of October and during November has 
been shown, and the important naval legis- 
lation of November has been presented. 
It was now only a question of time until 
Congress would heed the recommendations 
of Rhode Island. On December 9, 1775, 
the Rhode Island instructions once more 



1. Gammell, Life of Samuel Ward, in 
Sparks 's American Biography, 2nd, IX, 316 



L 



Navy of the American Revolution 85 

came up, and a day for their consideration 
was fixed, Monday, December 11.^ On the 
11th, *' agreeable to the order of the day, 
the Congress took into consideration the 
instructions given to the delegates of Rhode 
Island;" whereupon a committee of twelve 
was appointed to devise ways and means 
for furnishing these colonies with a naval 
armament.^ This committee performed its 
work with commendable celerity, and 
brought in, on December 13, one of the most 
important reports in the history of the 
naval affairs under the Revolution, for by 
its acceptance Congress committed itself to 
the estabhshment of a considerable naval 
force. Congress determined to build thir- 
teen frigates, five of 32, five of 28, and 
three of 24 guns, to be distributed, as re- 
gards the place of their construction, amon^ 
the states as follows : New Hampshire, one ; 
Massachusetts, two; Rhode Island, two; 
Connecticut, one; New York, two; Pennsyl- 
vania, four; and Maryland, one. It was 
estimated that these ships would cost on 
the average $66,666.67 each, and that their 
whole cost would amount to $866,666.67. 
All the materials for fitting them for sea 
could be procured in America except can- 
vas and gunpowder.^ 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 9, 1775. 

2. Ibid., December il, 1775. 

3. Ibid., December 13, 1775. 



86 Navy of the American Revolution 

On December 14 a committee consisting 
of one member from each colony was chosen 
by ballot to take charge of the building and 
fitting out of these vessels. The members 
chosen with their states were as follows: 
Josiah Bartlett, New Hampshire; John Han- 
cock, Massachusetts; Stephen Hopkins, 
Rhode Island; Silas Deane, Connecticut; 
Francis Lewis, New York; Stephen Crane, 
New Jersey; Robert Morris, Pennsylvania; 
George Read, Delaware; Samuel Chase, 
Maryland; R. H. Lee, Virginia; Joseph 
Hewes, North Carolina; Christopher Gads- 
den, South Carohna; John Houston, Geor- 
gia.^ This committee was substantially the 
same as that which reported the naval in- 
crease on the 13th; the only changes were in 
the members from Massachusetts and Mary- 
land, and in the addition of a member from 
Georgia. The committee was a very able 
one, comprising several of the foremost men 
of the Revolution. Hancock, Morris, Hop- 
kins, and Hewes were especially interested 
in naval and maritime affairs. The absence 
of the name of John Adams is probably ac- 
counted for by his return home early in 
December. 

This new committee was soon designated 
as the Marine Committee, by which name 
it was referred to throughout the Revolu- 
tion. Larger, and, with its engrossing work 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 14, 1775. 



Navy of the American Revolution 87 

of building and fitting out the thirteen fri- 
gates, more active than the Naval Commit- 
tee, it soon overshadowed and finally ab- 
sorbed its colleague. This absorbtion was 
facilitated no doubt by the fact that the 
four members of the Naval Committee re- 
maining in January, 1776, also belonged 
to the new committee. With the exception 
of the rendering of its accounts, the duties 
of the Naval Committee came to an end with 
the sailing of Hopkins's fleet in February, 
1776.^ The Marine Committee now ac- 
quired a firm grasp of the naval business of 
the colonies, and from this time until De- 
cember, 1779, it was the recognized and re-' 
sponsible head of the Naval Department, 
and as such, during the period that saw 
the rise and partial decline of the Conti- 
nental navy, its history is of prime im- 
portance. 

The Marine Committee like the Naval 
Committee had at Philadelphia an office of 
its own, and held its sessions in the evening. 
Its officers consisted of a chairman or presi- 
dent, a vice-president, and a secretary.^ 
Its clerical force comprised one or more 
clerks. On June 6, 1777, Congress resolved 
that five of its members — which number 
thereafter constituted a quorum — should 

1. Journals of Continental Congress. Janu- 
ary 25, September 19. 1776. See Ford's new 
edition of the Jouruals. 

2. The Secretary of the Marine Committee 
was John Brown. 



I 



88 Navy of the American Revolution 

form a ''board" for the transaction of busi- 
ness.^ Each of the thirteen states had one 
member on the Committee. Rarely did 
more than one-half of the Committee's mem- 
bers attend its sessions. Its personnel was 
continually changing. This was necessita- 
ted in part by a similar change in the mem- 
bership of Congress; as the old members 
retired, the new ones filled their places. 
The members of the Marine Committee re- 
ceived no pay for their naval services as 
such. Each state of course paid its mem- 
ber of the Committee for his services as a 
delegate to the Continental Congress. The 
wages of the secretary of the Committee 
and of its clerical force varied. On June 16, j 
1778, the Committee was permitted to raise I 
the wages of its clerks to $100 a month.^ 
The secretary was paid at the rate of $8,000 
a year after November 2, 1778.^ During 
1778 and 1779 Congress was raising the 
salaries of its executive employees because 
of the depreciation of the currency. 

The most responsible duties of the Com- 
mittee naturally fell to the four or five 
members oldest in its service. From this 
class it drew its chairmen. Three out of 
the five men who are known to have filled 
this office were on the first list of the Com- 



! 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, June 
6, 1777. 

2. Ibid., June 16, 1778. 

3. Ibid., January 27, 1780. 



Navy of the American Revolution 89 

mittee's members. During possibly all of 
1776, and for a part of 1777, courtly John 
Hancock presided over the Marine Com- 
mittee, while at the same time he dignified 
the chair of the President of Congress. In 
December, 1777, Henry Laurens of South 
Carolina had succeeded to both of Han- 
cock's positions.^ In 1778 and 1779 the 
mantles of the first leaders in naval admin- 
istration, whether they exactly fitted or 
not, were worn by Richard Henry Lee, "one 
of the fine fellows from Virginia"; Samuel 
Adams of Massachusetts ; and William Whip- 
ple of New Hampshire. Lee was chairman 
in the summer of 1778. Probably before 
December of that year, certainly by that 
time, Adams had succeeded him.^ Adams 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 27, 1777. 

2. Lee, however, signed a letter as chair- 
man in March, 1779. Relative to Samuel 
Adams's work in the Marine Committee, these 
words of his biographer possess interest : 
"Upon his arrival in Congress [May 21, 1778], 
he was added to the Marine Committee, of 
which important Board he was made chairman, 
and continued to direct its duties, for the next 
two years. In this arduous position, judged 
from the great number of reports and the mul- 
tipHcity of business submitted to it, Adams 
might fairly have claimed exemption from all 
other employments." — Wells, Life and Public 
Services of Samuel Adams, III, 13. Mr. Wells 
exaggerates the length of the naval services of 
Adam.s, v/ho left Philadelphia about June 20, 
1779; whereupon William Whipple succeeded 
him as chairman of the Marine Committee. 



9© A'QZ'y of tJic American Revolution 

in turn yielded in June, 1779, to Whipple, 
who continued to fill the office until the 
Committee was superseded by a Board of 
Admiralty in December, 1779. 

There were other members besides the 
chairmen upon whose shoulders rested the 
burden of the naval business. Morris, 
Hewes, and Hopkins have been previously 
mentioned as members who were deeply 
interested in naval affairs. Morris was for 
a time vice-president of the Committee. 
During the winter of 1776-77, while Congress 
was at Baltimore, he remained in Philadel- 
•phia, and, for a time, practically without 
assistance from the Committee, adminis- 
tered the naval affairs of the colonies. 
William Ellery of Rhode Island, who on 
October 13, 1776, succeeded Hopkins, showed 
zeal in the business of the navy. The work 
of Francis Lewis of New York deserves 
mention. No doubt there were other 
members whose naval services were consid- 
erable. Unfortunately, time has been care- 
less with many of the records of the Marine 
Committee, 

In carrying out the resolutions of Con- 
gress of December 13, 1775, authorizing the 
building of thirteen frigates, the Marine 
Committee employed agents to superin- 
tend the work. These agents, who were 
variously designated, were residents of the 
colonies in which they were employed, and 
their selection was usually determined by 



Nuz'y of the American Revolution 91 

t: local advice and influence. The New Hamp- 

I shire frigate, the '^ Raleigh/' 32, was built 

at Portsmouth under the direction of John 

f. Langdon, formerly a member of the Naval 

( Committee, but now Continental agent at 

: Portsmouth. He employed three master- 

f builders, who completed the frigate within 

i less than sixty days after raising it.^ The 

Massachusetts frigates, the '^Hancock," 32, 

; and the '^ Boston,'' 24, were built at Salis- 

. bury and Newburyport, under the direction 

of an agent.^ 

The Rhode Island vessels, the "War- 
ren," 32, and the ''Providence/' 28, were 
constructed at Providence, under the super- 
intendence of a committee of twelve influ- 
ential men of that city, who were appointed 
by Stephen Hopkins, the Rhode Island 
member of the Marine Committee, Certain 
complaints were lodged with the Marine 
Committee against the committee at Provi- 
dence. One of these was made by Commo- 
dore Hopkins, who charged that the '^ Provi- 
dence" and the "Warren" had cost twice 
as much as their contract price, "owing to 
some of the very committee that built the 
ships taking the workmen and the stock 
agreed for off to work and fit their priva- 
teers, and even threatening the workmen 



1. New Hampshire Gazette, June 1, 1776. 

2. Probably put upon the stocks at Salis- 
bury and completed at Newburyport. 



I 



1 



92 Naz'y of the American Revolution 

if they did not work for them/^^ When in 
the fall of 1776 the Marine Committee wrote 
to the committee, blaming its members for 
some of their proceedings, they relinquished 
their authority over the two vessels to 
Stephen Hopkins.^ 

The ^'Trumbull" was built under the di- 
rection of agents at Chatham on the Con 
necticut river.^ Two other frigates wer 
begun in Connecticut in 1777, the ''Confed- 
eracy/' 36, on the Thames river between 
Norwich and New London, and the ''Bour- 
bon," 28, at Chatham on the Connecticut 
Each of these two frigates was constructed 
under a superintendent re^^sponsible to Gov- 
ernor Jonathan Trumbull and the Connec- 
ticut Council of Safety.^ Two Commission- 
ers at Poughkeepsie, New York, had charge 
of the work on the "Montgomery," 28, and 
"Congress," 24. The Marine Committee 
kept fairly well in its own hands the direc- 
tion of the building at Philadelphia of th 
Pennsvlvania frigates, the "Randolph," 32, 
the "Washington," 32, the "Effingham," 

1. Edward Field, State of Rhode Island 
and Providence Plantations, II, 423. 

2. Staples, Annals of Providence, 267-8; 
Marine Committee Letter Book, Marine Com- 
mittee to Stephen Hopkins, and Marine Com- 
mittee to Committee for Building the Conti- 
nental Frigates at Providence, October 9, 
1776. 

3. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
526. 

4. Records of State of Connecticut, I, 177. 



A^az'x of the American Revolution 93 

28, and the ''Delaware/' 24. The ''Vir- 
ginia/' 28, was built at Baltimore, Mary- 
land, with the assistance of the Baltimore 
Committee of Observation.^ When under 
the resolves of Congress of November 20, 
1776, two frigates were begun at the Gos- 
port navy-yard in Virginia, the work was 
p'aced in charge of two commissioners 
and a master-builder. Richard Henry Lee, 
the Virginia member of the Marine Commit- 
tee, made the contract with the master- 
builder.^ 

The need of some one to receive and dis- 
pose of prizes soon led to the appointment 
of "agents for prizes" in the leading sea- 
ports of the colonies. On April 23, 1776, 
Congress, on the recommendation of the 
Marine Committee, appointed prize agents 
as follows: One at Boston; one at Provi- 
dence; one at New London, Connecticut; 
one at New York; two at Philadelphia; one 
at Baltimore; one at Williamsburg, Virginia; 
and one each at Wilmington, Newbern, and 
Edenton, North Carolina.^ On June 25, 
1776, Congress appointed an agent at Ports- 
mouth, New Hampshire.^ In November, 



1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 350, 
636, 989; III, 827. 

2. Marine Committee Letter Book, Marine 
Committee to David Stodder, master-builder, 
April 11, 1778. 

3. Journals of Continental Congress, April 
23, 1776. 

4. Ibid., June 25, 1776. 



L 



94 ^'az'y of the Ar,iericaii Revolution 

1776, the Marine Committee selected two 
prize agents for South CaroHna and one for 
Georgia.^ This list was not completed until 
September 1, 1779, when Congress appointed 
a prize agent for New" Jersey.^ These agents 
had charge of all Continental prizes sent into 
their respective states. By far the most im- 
portant agency was that of John Bradford 
at Boston. It may be estimated that ont 
half of all the prizes captured by the Conti- 
nental vessels in American waters were or- 
dered to Boston. The naval port second in 
importance was Philadelphia. 

The duties of the prize agents w^ere tc 
libel all of the Continental prizes sent into 
their jurisdiction, see that the prizes were 
tried by the proper admiralty court; and 
after they had been legally condemned, to 
sell them, and make an equitable distribu- 

1. Force, American Archives, 5th, III, 
671, 739-40. The first prize agents to be ap- 
pointed, many of whom held their offices 
throughout the greater part of the Revolu- 
tion, were as follows: John Langdon, Ports- 
mouth; John Bradford, Boston; Daniel Til- 
linghast. Providence; Nathaniel Shaw, jr., 
New London; Jacobus Vanzant, New York; 
John Nixon and John Maxwell Nesbit, Phila- 
delphia ; William Lux, Baltimore; John Taze- 
well, Williamsburg; Robert Smith, Edenton; 
Richard Ellis, Newbern; Cornelius Harnet, 
Wilmington; Livinus Clarkson and John Dor- 
sius, Charleston; John Wereat, Savannah; and 
Okey Hoaglandt, New Jersey. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep- 
tember 1, 1779. 



A^az'y of the Aincrican Revolution 95 

tion of the proceeds, in accordance with the 
resohitions of Congress governing the shar- 
ing of prizes. The prize agents were direct- 
ed by the Marine Committee to render to it 
a quarterly statement showing the prizes 
received, sales effected, and distributions of 
the proceeds made.^ 

The same men who were prize agents were 
also as a rule "Continental agents/' in 
w^hich latter capacity they served the vari- 
ous administrative organs of Congress, in- 
cluding the Marine Committee. They as- 
sisted the Committed and commander-in- 
chief of the fleet in purchasing, refitting, 
provisioning, and manning the armed ves- 
sels. The naval services of some of these 
men, both as prize agents and as Continental 
agents, were so considerable as to render 
their names worthy of mention. Most con- 
spicuous among the several naval agents 
were John Bradford of Boston, John Nixon 
and John Maxwell Nesbit of Philadelphia, 
John Langdon of Portsmouth, New Hamp- 
shire, Nathaniel Shaw, jr., of New London, 
and Daniel Tillinghast of Providence. 

The governors and legislatures of the colo- 
nies and other local governmental authori- 
ties often aided the Committee in its work. 
The work of Governor Trumbull and the 
Connecticut Council of Safety in the build- 
ing of the Continental frigates in that state 



1. Force,AniericanArchives,5th,II, 1113-14. 



k 



g6 A'avy of the American Revolution 

has already been noted. In the latter part 
of 1776 the New York Convention attempted 
in behalf of the Marine Committee to secure 
the two Continental frigates at Poughkeepsie 
from the British when they occupied the 
lower Hudson. Such illustrations could be 
multiplied. In two services so closely con- 
nected as the navy and the army, the offi- 
cers and agents of one were naturally now 
and then called upon to serve the other. 
They borrowed from and lent to each other 
cannon, ammunition, and military stores. 
The Commissaries of- one and the Navy 
Boards of the other had mutual dealings. 
The Commissary-General of Prisoners of 
the Army had much to do with the care of 
the marine prisoners. 

Towards the close of 1776 the unsatisfac- 
tory state of the naval business, together 
with its increase and its growing complex- 
ity, forced home upon the Committee the 
necessity of providing some permanent force 
to take charge of the details of naval admin- 
istration. Accordingly, on November 6, 
1776, Congress at the instance of the Marine 
Committee resolved '^that three persons, 
well skilled in maritime affairs, be immedi- 
ately appointed to execute the business of 
the navy, under the direction of the marine 
committee."^ Later in the same month 
John Nixon, John Wharton, and Francis 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 28, November 6, 1776. 



A^avy of the American Revolution 97 

Hopkinson were selected as suitable persons 
for this work, all three living within or near 
Philadelphia. 

Nixon with his experience as a shipping 
merchant was probably best fitted for his 
task. Fancy may discern a poetic fitness in 
his choice, since he had been the owner of 
the ''Alfred/' the first vessel of the Ameri- 
can navy. Nixon also had the distinction 
of being the first man to read publicly the 
Declaration of Independence. Wharton be- 
longed to the distinguished Philadelphia 
family of that name. Of the three men, 
Hopkinson probably had the widest culture. 
At the outbreak of the Revolution he was 
practicing law at Bordentown, New Jersey. 
He was one of the Signers of the Declaration 
of Independence. From 1779 to 1789 he 
was judge of the Admiralty Court of Penn- 
sylvania. He is best known, however, not 
for his substantial services, but as the au- 
thor of the humorous ballad, the ''Battle of 
the Kegs." 

On April 19, 1777, Congress on the motion 
of John Adams decided to form a similar 
board for the New England states, the mem- 
bers of which were to "reside at or in the 
neighborhood of Boston, in the state of 
Massachusetts Bay, with a power to adjourn 
to any part of New England; who shall have 
the superintendence of all naval and marine 
affairs of these United States within the 
four eastern states, under the direction of 



98 iVai'3' of the American Revolution 

the marine committee."^ Adams secm^ed 
the filling of this board with some difficulty 
owing to the indifference of Congress to its 
establishment. Finally, nine men were nom- 
inated, and on May 6 three of these were cho- 
sen commissioners, James Warren of Ply- 
mouth, Massachusetts; William Vernon of 
Providence, Rhode Island ; and John Deshon 
of New London, Connecticut.^ 

Foremost of the three Commissioners was 
Warren, an eminent patriot, who had been 
President of the Massachusetts Provincial 
Congress and also of the Massachusetts 
Board of War. He was an intimate friend 
of John and Samuel Adams, and, it is said, 
much resembled the latter in character. 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, April 
19, 1777. 

2. On May 6, 1777, John Adams wrote to 
James Warren notifying him of his appoint- 
ment. He added a few words explaining the 
character of the position: " You will have the 
building and fitting of all ships, the appoint- 
ment of officers, the establishment of arsenals 
and magazines, which will take up your whole 
time; but it will be honorable to be so capitally 
concerned in laying a foundation of a great 
navy. The profit to you will be nothing; but 
the honor and the virtue the greater. I almost 
envy you this employment." — Works of John 
Adams, IX, 465. On May 9, the Rhode Island 
member of the Marine Committee notified 
William Vernon of his appointment. — Publi- 
cations of the Rhode Island Historical Society, 
VIII, 206. See also Massachusetts Historical 
Society Collections, 7th, II, 45. 



Navy of the American Revolution 99 

Vernon, who served as President of the 
Navy Board; was a most distinguished New- 
port merchant and one of the most self-sac- 
rificing of patriots. During the Revokition 
he advanced large sums of money to the 
government, which were only in part repaid. 
Before the war his trade extended to all the 
maritime nations of Europe and to the West 
Indies and Africa.^ Deshon was of Hugue- 
not descent. He was conspicuous in the 
Revolutionary party of New London, and 
was a captain in his state's military forces. 
He rendered much assistance in fitting out 
the Connecticut navy. 

These two boards were variously desig- 
nated in the official documents of the time. 
The one was most frequently called the 
Navy Board of the Middle Department or 
District, or the Navy Board at Philadelphia, 
Bordentown, or Baltimore, according to its 
location; and the other, the Navy Board of 
the Eastern Department or District, or the 
Navy Board at Boston. The Navy Board 
at Philadelphia was at first referred to as 
the Continental Navy Board, or the Board 
of Assistants. These two names indicate 
that when the board at Philadelphia was 
formed, the establishing of a second board 
was not in contemplation. The Navy Board 
at Philadelphia seems to have taken little 
or no part in the naval affairs in New Eng- 

1. New England Historical and Genealogi- 
cal Register, XXX, 316-18. 



lOO Xavy of the American Rcz'oliition 

land. It was hardly settled in its work be- 
fore the Navy Board at Boston was created. 
Attention should be called to the fact that 
the offices of Navy Board and of Commis- 
sioner of the Navy had long been established 
in the British navy. The British offices 
served in some degree as models to Con- 
gress and the Marine Committee.^ 

Each board had a secretary, treasurer, 
and paymaster; but one person sometimes 
served in two, or even the three, capacities. 
Each board had one, and sometimes two 
clerks. A clerkship was at times joined 
with one of the other offices. The boards as 
a rule selected their own employees. Any 

1. When the Navy Board at Philadelphia 
was being established and its commissioners 
appointed, William Ellery wrote to William 
Vernon as follows: " I should be glad to know 
what is the Office of Commissioners of the 
Navy, and that you would point it out par- 
ticularly ; unless you can refer rae to some 
Author who particularly describes. The Con- 
duct of the Affairs of a Navy as well as those 
of an i\.r.my, We are yet to learn. We are 
still unacquainted with the systematical man- 
agement of them, although We have made 
considerable Progress in the latter. It is the 
Duty of every Friend to his Country to throw 
his Knowledge into the common Stock. I 
know you are well skilled in Commerce and I 
believe you are acquainted with the System of 
the British Navy, and I am sure of your Dispo- 
sition to do every Service to the Cause of Lib- 
erty in your Power." — Publications of Rhode 
Island Historical Society, VIII, 201, Papers of 
William Vernon and the Navy Board. 



Navy of the American Revolution loi 

two members of the Navy Board at Boston 
were empowered by Congress on October 
23, 1777, to form a quorum.^ 

With the exception of the resignation of 
Deshon in May, 1781, the Navy Board at 
Boston did not change in personnel. Its 
headquarters remained continually at Bos- 
ton. On the other hand, the membership 
of the Navy Board at Philadelphia made 
several changes. On May 9, 1778, Wil- 
liam Smith of Baltimore was elected in the 
place of John Nixon, who had resigned.^ 
On August 19, Hopkinson and Smith 
having resigned, Captain Nathaniel 
Falconer and James Searle, both of 
Pennsylvania, were appointed.^ Falconer 
declined the appointment; Searle accepted, 
but resigned on September 26.^ Meanwhile, 
Wharton had resigned, and the three com- 
missionerships w^ere vacant. On November 
4, 1778, the vacancies were filled by the re- 
appointment of Wharton, and the selection 
of James Read of Delaware, the clerk and 
paymaster of the Board, and William Win- 
der,^ a captain in the military forces of Mary- 
land and a judge of the court of appeals of 
Somerset county in that state. When in 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 23, 1777. 

2. Ibid., May 9, 1778. 

3. Ibid., August 19, 1778. 

4. Ibid., September 28, 1778. 

5. Ibid., November 4, 1778. 



I02 Navy of the American Revolution 

December, 1776, Philadelphia seemed to be 
in danger from the enemy, Congress and the 
Board retreated to Baltimore, where they 
spent the winter of 1776-1777. The fortunes 
of war compelled the Board in the fall of 
1777 to retreat to Bordentown, New Jersey; 
and after the American fleet in the Dela- 
ware was destroyed, the Marine Committee 
early in 1778 ordered it to Baltimore,^ 
where it was situated for a few months. In 
the summer of 1778 it returned permanently 
to Philadelphia; 

The salary of a commissioner of the navy 
was first fixed at $1,500 a year. On October 
31, 1778, ''in consideration of the extensive 
business of their departments," this salary 
was raised to $3,000, and on November 12, 
1779, on the depreciation of the currency, 
to $12,000. It was reduced on September 
25, 1780, to $1,500, and was now paid quar- 
terly in specie or its equivalent. The sal- 
aries of the employees of the Nav}^ Boards 
underwent like variations. Beginning with 
$500, they advanced in some instances as 
high as $2,000 a year. On August 4, 1778, 
the clerk of the Navy Board at Boston was 
made a special allowance of $500, " in consid- 



I 



1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Marine 
Committee to Navy Board of Middle Depart- 
ment, January 22, 1778. The Philadelphia 
Board was ordered on January 22 to remove 
to Baltimore, but it appears th^t it did not go 
until April. 



Navy of the American Revolution 103 

eration of the great and constant business," 
in which he had been engaged.^ 

To recapitulate, the chief agents of the 
Marine Committee were these: the Navy 
Boards, the prize agents, the Continental 
agents, and the agents for building vessels. 
After the creation of the Navy Boards, the 
latter three classes served in part as their 
sub-agents; but by no means entirely so, 
for the Marine Committee gave many orders 
over the heads of the Boards. 

The Marine Committee and its principal 
agents employed many minor agents. One 
illustration, taken from the work of the 
Navy Boards as purveyors of the navy, will 
suffice to show the subordinate character of 
the services which these minor agents ren- 
dered. It is recorded that the Navy Board 
at Boston had in its employ in New Hamp- 
shire "a contractor of beef for the navy," 
who in turn had in his employ a single 
drover, that by September, 1779, had pur- 
chased more than one thousand head of 
cattle for the use of the Navy Board at 
Boston. 2 



1. For salaries of the Commissioners of the 
Navy and their emploj^ees, see Journals of Con- 
tinental Congress, November 7, 1776; April 19, 
1777; October 23, 1777; October 10, 1778; 
October 31, 1778; November 12, 1779; Janu- 
ary 28, 1780; and September 25, 1780. ^ 

2. Miscellaneous Manuscripts, Division of 
Manuscripts, Library of Congress. 



k 



CHAPTER IV 

THE WORK OF THE NAVY BOARDS AND 
" THE MARINE COMMITTEE 

There was a painful lack of system about 
the business methods of the Naval Depart- 
ment of the Revolution. Then, official rou- 
tine was not settled as at present. Usage 
had had no opportunity to establish fixed 
and orderly forms of procedure; and amid 
the distractions of war, when some real or 
supposed emergency was continually invit- 
ing one authority or another to disregard 
regularity and order, usage could obtain 
but scant permission to begin its work. 
Wars are famous for breaking through, not 
for forming a crust of official precedent. 
The administrative machinery of armies and 
navies tends to adapt itself to the condi- 
tions of peace — now the normal state of na- 
tions. During long periods of partial stag- 
nation this machinery becomes complicated; 
its tension is weakened; and many of its 
axles grow rusty from disuse. When war 
breaks out, the conditions of administra- 
tion are greatly changed. A thousand ex- 
tra calls for work to be done at once are 



Navy of the American Revolution 105 

loud and inexorable. Expedition must be 
had at all hazards and costs. Rapid action 
of the administrative machinery must be 
obtained, its tension screwed down, extra 
cog wheels discarded, and efficient machin- 
ists substituted for the dotards of peace. 
It is obvious that with this sort of difficulty 
those who managed the naval affairs during 
the Revolution did not have to contend, for 
the organ of naval administration was then 
created from its foundation. Their difficul- 
ties sprang not from the age, but from the 
newness of this organ. It lacked a nice cor- 
relation of parts, the smooth action that 
comes from long service, and the system 
that immemorial routine establishes. 

The absence of system in the Naval De- 
partment was most conspicuous in the ap- 
pointment of naval officers, from the cap- 
tain to the coxswain. This work was shared 
by Congress, the Marine Committee, the 
Navy Boards, the Continental agents, the 
Commander-in-chief of the navy, the com- 
manders of vessels, recruiting agents, the 
Commissioners at Paris, and the commer- 
cial agents residing in foreign countries. 
Appointments were sometimes actually de- 
termined by the governors of states, '^ con- 
spicuous citizens,'' and local governmental 
bodies. A good illustration of the way in 
which convenience was sometimes consulted 
is found in the resolution of Congress of 
June 14, 1777, which designated William 



io6 A'az'x of the American Revolution 

Whipple, the New Hampshire member of 
the Marine Committee, John Langdon, Con- 
tinental agent at Portsmouth, and John 
Paul Jones, the commander of the ship 
''Ranger,^' to select the commissioned and 
warrant officers of the ''Ranger," then at 
Portsmouth.^ In a new navy without esprit 
de corps, to permit a commander to have a 
voice in choosing his own officers often made 
for proper subordination. 

It was a source of annoyance and confu- 
sion to the Navy Boards to find through ac- 
cidental sources of information, as they 
sometimes did, that the Marine Committee 
had given orders to naval agents to transact 
business, the immediate control of which 
was vested in the Boards. Naval agents 
sometimes discovered that they were serving 
in a single task tw^o or three naval masters. 
Irregularities were chargeable not alone to 
the Naval Department. The governor of a 
state was known on his own authority, to 
the vexation of the rightful executive, to 
take part in the direction of the cruises of 
Continental vessels. Naval commanders 
were now and then guilty of breaches of 
their orders. Congress had its share in the 
confusing of business. On one occasion, 
making a display of its ignorance, it sus- 
pended Captain John Roach from a com- 
mand to which he had not been appointed; 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, June 
14, 1777. 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 107 

Roach in fact was not an officer in the Con- 
tinental navy.^ It sometimes made imprac- 
ticable details of the armed vessels. It 
also exercised its privilege of referring to 
special committees bits of business that 
logically belonged to the Marine Committee. 

These irregularities, notwithstanding their 
number, were after all exceptions. The very 
nature of business forces it to follow some 
system, however imperfectly. Where there 
is a number of agents there must be a 
division of labor. Without such arrange- 
ments chaos would exist. It is therefore 
possible to set forth with some detail the 
respective duties of the Marine Committee, 
the Navy Boards, and the various naval 
agents. The work and duties of the naval 
agents have already been treated with suffi- 
cient particularity. The work of the Navy 
Boards and the Marine Committee will be 
considered in this chapter. 

The duties of the Navy Boards were of a 
varied character. Each Board superin- 
tended the building, manning, fitting, pro- 
visioning, and repairing of the armed ves- 
sels in its district. It kept a register of the 
vessels which it built, showing the name, 
dimensions, burden, number of guns, tackle, 
apparel, and furniture of each vessel. Each 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, June 
14, 1777. Marine Committee Letter Book, 
Committee to Navy Board at Boston, March 
6. 1778. 



io8 Navy of the American Revolution 

Board had records of all the officers, sailors, 
and marines in its district, and required the 
commanders to make returns of these items 
upon the termination of their cruises. It 
was the duty of the Boards to notify the 
Marine Committee of the arrivals and de- 
partures of the Continental vessels. They 
were required to settle the naval accounts 
and ''to keep fair Books of all expenditures 
of Publick Moneys.'^ The records of their 
transactions were to be open to the inspec- 
tion of Congress and the Marine Committee. 
They rendered to the Committee annually, 
or oftener when required, an account of 
their disbursements. The Boards paid the 
salaries of officers and seamen, and audited 
the accounts of the prize agents.^ 

In the appointment of officers the Navy 
Board at Boston was given a freer rein than 
was its colleague at Philadelphia. The 
share of the Navy Boards in selecting officers 
and in enlisting seamen was about as fol- 
low^s. The Boards superintended the ap- 
pointing of petty officers and the enlisting 
of seamen, both of which duties were 
chiefly performed by the commanders of 
vessels and by recruiting agents. The 
Boards generally selected the warrant offi- 
cers, very frequently on the recommenda- 
tion of the commanders. If the one appoint- 

1. Publications of Rhode Island Historical 
Society, VIII, 208, Instructions of Marine Com- 
mittee to the Eastern Navy Board, July 10, 1777. 



Navy of the American Revolution 109 

ment to the office of Commander-in-chief be 
disregarded, there existed but two classes of 
commissioned officers in the Revolutionary 
navy, captains and Ueutenants. The 
Boards often chose the Ueutenants; and 
they generally recommended the captains 
to the Marine Committee. The Commit- 
tee furnished the Boards with blank w^ar- 
rants and commissions, signed by the Presi- 
dent of Congress. When one of these forms 
was properly ffiled out by a navy board for 
an officer, the validity of his title to his 
position and rank could not be questioned. 
The Boards were empowered under cer- 
tain circumstances, and in accordance with 
the rules and regulations of the navy and 
the resolutions of Congress, to order the 
holding of courts of enquiry and courts-mar- 
tial. They could administer oaths to the 
judges and officials of these courts. A 
Board might suspend an officer of the navy 
who treated it with "indecency and disre- 
spect.''^ On October 23, 1777, the Navy 
Board at Boston was given power to sus- 
pend a naval officer, "until the pleasure of 
Congress shall be known. ''^ Not always 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 30, 1777. The occasion of this grant 
of power by Congress was a letter complaining 
of "disrespect and ill treatment" which a 
member of the Navy Board of the Middle De- 
partment had received at the hands of John 
Barry, commander of the frigate "Effingham." 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 23, 1777. 



no A^az'y of the American Revolution 

did the kindliest relations exist between 
the Navy Boards and the commanders of 
the vessels. Officers who but yesterday 
tramped the decks of their own merchant- 
men, giving commands but not receiving 
them, chafed under the subordination that 
their position in the navy exacted. 

The Navy Boards made public the reso- 
lutions of Congress on naval affairs, copies 
of which they lodged with the prize agents, 
the commanders of vessels, and all inter- 
ested persons. They distributed among 
the naval captains the rules and regulations 
of the navy, the sea-books, and the naval 
signals. The Boards acted in an advisory 
capacity to the Marine Committee, which 
frequently called upon them for informa- 
tion or opinions; when a revision of the 
rules and regulations of the navy was under 
consideration their assistance in the work 
was requested. Sometimes they volun- 
teered important suggestions looking to the 
betterment of the navy. They communi- 
cated frequently with the Committee, giv- 
ing in detail the state of the naval business 
in their respective districts. ^^^ 

In the hiring, purchase, and b^HFg of 
vessels the Boards had to do wit^Braft of 
all sorts, freight-boats, fire-ships,. r galleys, 
packets, brigs, schooners, sloops, ships, fri- 
gates, and men-of-war. Measured by the 
standards of the time, the building of one 
of the larger vessels was a work of some 



Xaz'y of the Ajiicrican Revolution iii 

magnitude. A notion of the men and ma- 
terials requisite for such an undertaking 
may be gained from an estimate, made 
early in 1780, of the sundries needed to 
complete the 74-gun ship ''America/' the 
largest of the Continental vessels constructed 
during the Revolution. The construction 
of this ship had been begun at Portsmouth, 
New Hampshire, in 1777. It was computed 
that one hundred and fifty workmen for an 
average period of eight months would be 
required. Fifty carpenters, twenty ordi- 
nary laborers, twenty caulkers, ten riggers, 
ten sailors, two master-builders, and an 
uncertain number of blacksmiths, sail- 
makers, coopers, plumbers, painters, gla- 
ziers, carvers, boat-builders, ship-copperers, 
tinners, cabinet-makers, and tanners were 
demanded. Materials and provisions were 
needed as follows: Seven hundred tons of 
timbers, one hundred casks of naval stores, 
forty tons of iron, one thousand water-casks, 
masts and spars of all sorts, sheets of lead, 
train oil, and oakum; provisions for most 
of the above workmen, and lastly, an indis- 
pensable lubricant for all naval services at 
this time, ''rum, one half pint per day, in- 
cluding extra hands, say for 150 hands, 8 
months, 12 hhds, 1310 gallons."^ In build- 
ing the armed vessels, the Boards were 
greatly hampered by the difficulty of ob- 

1. Records and papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 37, p. 217. 



112 Xavy of the American Revolution 

taining artisans, owing to their being called 
out for military service, or to their engaging 
in privateering. In providing armament 
and equipment, they were embarrassed by 
the inexperience of the colonists in casting 
cannon, and by the obstacles which they 
encountered in importing canvas, cables, 
arms, and ammunition. 

For the future use of the fleet the Navy 
Boards collected in due season provisions 
and naval stores. In their work as pur- 
veyors for the navy a knowledge of the 
baking of bread and the curing of meats 
might not prove amiss. The kinds and 
quantities of provisions which they bought 
may be judged from an estimate of the sup- 
plies that were requisite to equip for sea 
and for a single cruise the 36-gun frigate 
'' Confederacy. '' The names and quantities 
of the articles needed were as follows: 
bread, 35,700 lbs.; beef, 15,300 lbs.; pork, 
15,300 lbs.; flour, 5,100 lbs.; potatoes, 10,- 
000 lbs.; peas, 80 bus.; mutton, 2,500 lbs.; 
butter, 637 lbs.; rice, 2,550 lbs.; vinegar, 
160 gals.; and rum, 2,791 gals.* The 
Boards' supplies of naval stores consisted 
chiefly of canvas, sails, cordage, cables, tar, 
turpentine, and ship chandlery. 

The commissioners of each district made 
some division of their work among them- 
selves. For instance, the special task of 

1. Records and papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 37, p. 273. 



Navy of the American Revolution 113 

Wharton of the Philadelphia Board was the 
superintending of the accounting and the 
naval finances of the Middle District. Dur- 
ing 1778 Deshon of the Boston Board 
spent much time in Connecticut attending 
to the naval business in that state. This 
had to do chiefly with freeing the ''Trum- 
bull" frigate from a sandbar upon which 
she had grounded. During the same year 
Vernon was for a time at Providence en- 
deavoring to get to sea the Continental 
vessels which the British had blockaded in 
that port. For a part of the year Warren 
alone attended to the business of the 
Board at its headquarters at Boston. On 
August 4, 1778, Congress appropriated $365 
to each of the commissioners of the Navy 
Board at Boston to pay their traveling ex- 
penses during the past year, since in the 
right discharge of their office they were 
obliged "frequently to visit the different 
parts of their extensive district. '^^ 

In the extent of its powers and in the 
amount of its business the Boston Board 
exceeded the one at Philadelphia.^ This 
was largely owing to the centering of naval 
affairs in New England after the occupa- 
tion of Philadelphia in September, 1777; 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Au- 
gust 4, 1778. 

2. In the transmission of foreign mail the 
Navy Board at Boston acted as the agent of 
the Committee of Foreign Affairs. It both 
purchased and hired packet boats. 



114 Naz'y of the A'^erican Revolution 

and to the capture or destruction in that 
year of a large part of the fleet to the 
southward of New England. After 1776 all 
the new vessels added in America to the 
navy, with the exception of two or three, 
were either purchased or built in New Eng- 
land. The long distance of the Marine 
Committee from Boston, with the conse- 
quent difficulties and delays in communi- 
cation, made it necessary for the Com- 
mittee to grant to the Boston Board larger 
powers than to the Philadelphia Board. 

The most important work of a Naval 
Office is the directing of the movements of 
the fleet, or in other words, the determining 
of the cruises of the armed vessels. This 
power the Marine Committee jealously 
guarded, and was loathe to yield anj^ part 
of it. The Committee was forced at times, 
however, to give to the Boston Board a 
considerable discretion. In July, 1777, it 
ordered the Board to send out the cruisers 
as fast as they could be got ready, "direct- 
ing the Commanders to such Latitudes as 
you shall think there will be the greatest 
chance of success in intercepting the enemy's 
Transports and Merchant Ships"; and in 
November, 1778, to send the vessels out, 
''either collectively, or singly, as you shall 
judge proper, using your discretion as to 
the time for which their Cruises shall con- 
tinue, and your best judgment in directing 
the commanders to such places and on such 



Aaz'y of the Aincrican Revolution 115 

stations as you shall think will be for the 
general benefit of the United States, and 
to annoy and distress the Enemy/'^ Such 
general orders were always subject to the 
particular plans and directions of the Com- 
mittee, which were by no means few. The 
Committee itself determined the service of 
all vessels that refitted at Philadelphia. As 
a consequence the duties of the Navy Board 
of the Middle Department had to do chiefly 
with the minor details of administration. 
Turning now from the work of the Navy 
Boards to that of the Marine Committee, 
one finds the significant fact to be the two- 
fold relation that the Committee bore to 
the Continental Congress. By reason of 
the union in Congress of both legislative 
and executive functions, the Committee 
was at one and the same time an adminis- 
trative organ of Congress charged with exe- 
cuting the business of its Naval Depart- 
ment, and its legislative committee on naval 
affairs. Naturally, there were at points no 
lines of demarkation between these two 
functions; and it is therefore not always 
easy, or even possible, to determine in which 
capacity the Committee is acting. The 
Committee's administrative duties, par ex- 
cellence, were the enforcing and the carrying 
out by means of its agents of the various 



1. Marine Committee Letter Book Com- 
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, July 11, 
1777; November 16, 1778. 



ii6 Naz'\ of the A lerican Revolution 

resolutions of Congress upon naval affairs. 
Already much light has been thrown upon 
this phase of the Committee's work in the 
treatment of the Navy Boards and the 
naval agents. 

It was the duty of the Marine Committee 
to see that the resolutions on naval affairs 
were brought to the attention of the proper 
persons, officers, agents, and authorities. 
As the head of the Naval Department, it 
issued its commands and orders to the Navy 
Boards, the naval agents, and the command- 
ers of vessels. This was done both verbally 
and by letters. The Navy Board of the 
Middle Department, the naval agents at 
Philadelphia, and often the naval officers 
in that port, conferred with the Committee 
and received orders by word of mouth. In 
the prosecution of its work outside of Phil- 
adelphia the Committee conducted a large 
correspondence, chiefly with the Navy 
Board at Boston, the naval agents at Ports- 
mouth, Boston, New London, and Balti- 
more, and the leading captains of the navy. 
It addressed letters to the governors of 
most of the states and to many of the 
local governmental authorities; to the Com- 
mander-in-chief of the navy, Washington, 
General Heath, General Schuyler, the Com- 
missary-General of Prisoners, Commissary- 
General of Purchases of the army, the mer- 
chants of Baltimore, Count D'Estaing, the 
Commissioners in Paris, and most of the cap- 



Navy of the American Revolution 117 

tains of the navy. This list of correspon- 
dents well represents the range of the busi- 
ness of the Committee. 

Through its recommendations to Con- 
gress the Marine Committee virtually se- 
lected almost all the captains of the navy 
and of the marine corps, many lieutenants 
of both services, as a rule the commission- 
ers of the navy, the prize agents, and the 
advocates for the trying of maritime causes. 
Appointments to these offices were rarely 
made by Congress contrary to the recom- 
mendations of the Committee, or on its own 
initiative independent of the Committee. 
A few captains and lieutenants of the navy- 
were appointed by representatives of the 
United States residing abroad. 

As is well known, all executive offices are 
called upon to establish certain forms, rules, 
and regulations for the guidance and gov- 
ernment of their agents. Of this character 
was the fixing by the Marine Committee of 
the naval signals, the forms for sea-books, 
and the proper uniforms for the naval offi- 
cers. The Committee's regulations on uni- 
forms were dated September 5, 1776. For 
captains they prescribed a blue coat 'Vith 
red lappels, slash cuff, stand-up collar, flat 
yellow buttons, blue britches, red waistcoat 
with narrow lace." The uniform of the offi- 
cers of the marines was equally resplendent 
in colors. It included a green coat, with 
white cuffs, a silver epaulet on the shoulder, 



ii8 Navy of the American Revolution 

white waistcoat and breeches edged with 
green, and black gaiters and garters. Green 
was the distinctive color of the marines. 
The privates were to display this badge in 
the form of green shirts, ''if they can be pro- 
cured. ^^^ Not enough information is acces- 
sible to the writer to determine what influ- 
ence the regulations prescribing the uniform 
of British officers had on those adopted by 
the Marine Committee. Both required in 
the uniform of captains, blue coats, stancl- 
ing-up collars, and flat buttons; neither re- 
quired epaulets, the wearing of which, as is 
well known, originated in France.^ It is 
probable that the prescribed uniform was 
little worn by the Continental naval officers. 
Grim necessity forced each officer to ran- 
sack whatever wardrobe Providence offered, 
and it is somewhat inaccurate to call their 
miscellaneous garbs ''uniforms." 

As the Naval Office at Philadelphia de- 
veloped, letters, memorials, and petitions 
poured in upon it in increasing numbers. 
Many of these communications were ad- 
dressed to the President of Congress, were 
read in Congress, and were formally referred 
to the Marine Committee to be acted or 
reported upon. It was only infrequently 
that Congress offered any suggestions as to 

1. Sherburne, Life of John Paul Jones, ed. 
1851, 30. Copies of the regulations on uni- 
forms will be found in John Paul Jones manu- 
scripts, Library of Congress. 

2. Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 347-50; IV, 182. 



A^az'y of the American Revolution 119 

their proper disposition. These complaints 
and requests were of a varied character, 
and came from many sources; not a few 
originated with that obsequious crowd, 
with axes to grind, that always attends upon 
official bodies. The wide range of these 
communications may be judged from the 
following subjects selected at random: 

New Hampshire and Massachusetts re- 
Cjuest that the frigates building in those 
states be ordered to defend the New Eng- 
land coast. ^ Governor Livingston of New 
Jersey asks for a naval office for a relative, 
Musco Livingston.^ Gerard, the minister 
of France to the United States, washes to 
know ''the opinion of Congress respecting 
his offering a premium to the owners of pri- 
vateers that shall intercept masts and spars 
belonging to the enemy, coming from Hali- 
fax to New York and Rhode Island."^ 
John Macpherson asserts that the position 
of commander-in-chief in the navy was prom- 
ised to him by Messrs. Randolph, Hop- 
kins, and Rutledge, to whom he communi- 
cated an important secret.* An affront has 
been offered several French captains in Bos- 
ton by the commander of the Continental 
frigate " Warren."^ Twelve lieutenants 

1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 315. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep- 
tember, 17, 1779. 

3. Ibid., December 7, 1778. 

4. Ibid., July 11, 1776. 

5. Ibid., June 16, 1778. 



120 Navy of the American Revohitio-n I| 

who had been dismissed from the navy for 
combining in order to extort an increase of 
pay, ask to be reinstated.^ The ambassa- 
dor of Naples at the Court of France, whose 
king has opened his ports to the American 
vessels, wishes ''to know the colours of the 
flag, and form of the sea-papers of the United 
States."^ Captain Biddle writes concern- 
ing the cruel treatment inflicted by Lord 
Howe upon Lieutenant Josiah of the Conti- 
nental navy.^ Captain Skimmer has been 
killed in .an action with the "Montague," 
and has left eleven children, nine of whom 
are unable to earn a livelihood. His widow 
asks for a pension.^ 

The Marine Committee made frequent re- 
ports to Congress, both in response to pre- 
vious orders therefrom, and of its own ac- 
cord in the course of its business. Occa- 
sionally parts of its reports were recommit- 
ted by Congress to a limited number of the 
Committee's members, doubtless for the 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
23, 24, 1777. 

2. Ibid., February 24, 1779. 

3. Ibid., August 7, 1776. 

4. Ibid., September 14, 23, 1778. The 
Marine Committee reported and Congress 
agreed that "the eastern navy board be direct- 
ed to supply 400 dollars annually, in quarterly 
payments, for the support of Captain Skimmer's 
widow and nine youngest children, and that 
this provision be continued three years. " This 
is the first instance of the granting by the 
United States of a pension to the family of a 
naval officer upon his death. 



Navy of the American Revolution 121 

purpose of obtaining prompt and expert 
action. The Committee sometimes as- 
signed special business to sub-committees, 
or to single members. The subjects which 
the Committee considered, discussed, and 
reported upon ran the whole gamut of na- 
val activities and interests. The substance 
of many of its reports may be found in the 
Journals of the Continental Congress for the 
years 1776, 1777, 1778, and 1779. During 
this period the Marine Committee prepared 
and reported the larger part of the naval 
legislation of Congress. It is true that spe- 
cial committees contributed something to 
this work, but these were composed in part 
of members of the Marine Committee. Con- 
gress, as a body, originated little, although 
occasionally it was moved to the passage of 
resolutions on naval affairs by some real or 
supposed emergency, the importunities of 
the self-seeking, or the whims of individual 
members. It of course amended the re- 
ports of its committees. 

The principal legislation of Congress re- 
lating to the navy which was passed during 
the incumbency of the Marine Committee 
will now be noted. No attempt will be 
made to separate those provisions that were 
the special work of the Marine Committee 
from the whole legislative output. 

During 1776 and 1777 Congress author- 
ized important naval increases. It directed 
the Marine Committee in March and April, 



122 Xaz'y oftlie America)! Revolution 

1776, to purchase "the armed vessel now in 
the river Delaware" and the ship '^MoUy/' 
to fit out two armed cutters, and to build 
two galleys "capable of carrying two 36 or 
42 pounders/'^ On November 20, 1776, 
Congress resolved to build immediately, 
one ship, 74, in New Hampshire; two ships, 
74 and 36, in Massachusetts; one ship, 74, 
a brig, 18, and a packet boat, in Pennsyl- 
vania; two frigates, 36 each, in Virginia; 
and two frigates, 36 each, in Mar3dand.^ 
Later, the size and armament of some of 
these vessels were reduced by the Marine 
Committee, and some of them were 
never completed. Only three of these 
ten vessels were armed, manned, and 
sent to sea as a part of the forces 
of the Continental navy. They were 
the "AUiance," 36, the "General Gates," 
18, both built in Massachusetts, and the 
"Saratoga," 16, built in Pennsylvania. 
The 74-gun ship "America," constructed at 
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, was not 
launched until shortly before the Revolu- 
tion ended. On January 23, 1777, Congress 
ordered' the construction of two frigates, 36 
and 28, in Connecticut. These two ships 
were named respectively the "Confederacy" 
and "Bourbon." On March 15, 1777, the 
Marine Committee was ordered to purchase 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, March 
13, March 28, April 3, April 14, 1776. 

2. Ibid., November 20, 1776. 



A'flT'V of the American Revolution 123 

three ships. ^ Congress gave directions 
for other naval increases, but they were not 
fully carried out. In July, 1777, owing to 
the ''extravagant prices now demanded 
for all kinds of materials used in ship-build- 
ing, and the enormous wages required by 
tradesmen and labourers," Congress em- 
powered the Committee to stop the building 
of such of the Continental vessels as they 
should judge proper." 

During 1776 many important appoint- 
ments and promotions in the navy and the 
marine corps w^ere made by the Marine Com- 
mittee, and confirmed by Congress. Sam- 
uel Nichols was placed at the head of the 
marines, with the rank of major. Twenty 
captains of the navy were appointed. Four 
of these had been appointed lieutenants on 
December 22, 1775, and were promoted, 
but the remaining sixteen were new ap- 
pointees. John Manly was taken from 
Washington's fleet. Nicholas Biddle, Thom- 
as Read, Charles Alexander, and James Josi- 
ah had seen service in the Pennsylvania 
navy; and James Nicholson in the Maryland 
navy. During this year there was a great 
scramble to obtain offices on board the thir- 
teen frigates, and amid the rivalries of poli- 
tics, it is not surprising that some candi- 
dates were successful that, unfortunately 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Janu- 
ary 23, March 15, 1777. 
2 Ibid., July 25, 1777. 



124 A^a^'3' of the American Revolution 

for the navy, had tasted Httle salt water.^ 
In mihtary services questions of promo- 
tion and rank are perennial sources of 
heartburning and jealousy. The advancing 
of an officer on any other principle than 
that of seniority in service rarely fails to 
arouse feelings of injustice and suspicions 
of partiality, which are only too often war- 
ranted. The discontent and insubordi- 
nation that ^uch a promotion incites must 
always be weighed against its beneficial re- 
sults. When, on October 10, 1776, Con- 
gress, in determining the rank of twenty- 
four captains and two lieutenants, disregard- 
ed the dates of their commissions and appoint- 
ments, it was unable to defend its act on the 
usual, and under some circumstances, tenable 
ground of the conspicuous services, marked 
talents, and signal professional skill of those 
favored. Once more Southern influences pre- 
vailed, and James Nicholson, of Maryland, 
commander of the frigate ''Virginia," was 
made the senior captain of the navy. This 
distinguishing of Nicholson, who was ap- 
pointed captain on June 6, 1776, worked 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, June 
25, October 10, 1776; Scribner's Magazine, 
XXIV, 29, Mahan, John Paul Jones in the 
Revolution, quotes a member of Congress writ- 
ing to Jones probably in the fall of 1776 : ' ' You 
would be surprised to hear what a vast num- 
ber of applications are continually making for 
officers of the new frigates, especially for the 
command." 



A'az'y of the American Revolution 125 

a hardship to the officers, and especially to 
the four captains, appointed on December 
22, 1775. John Paul Jones, who stood fifth 
in rank in the list of December 22, and now 
found himself eighteenth, smarted under 
the injustice which was done him.^ It is 
noteworthy that from March, 1777, when 
Esek Hopkins was suspended from his po- 
sition of commander-in-chief of the fleet, 
until the end of the Revolution, the head of 
the Continental army and the ranking offi- 
cer of the navy came from adjoining 
Southern states.^ 

On November 15, 1776, Congress fixed 



1. Jones made a cop}'" of the list of cap- 
tains of the navy arranged in accordance with 
their respective ranks, upon which copy he 
commented: "Whereby No. 18 is superseded 

by 13 [^^^en] altho their superior 

Merits and Abilities are at best Presumptive, 
and not one of them was in the service the 
7th day of December, 1775, v/hen No. 18 was 
appointed Senior Lieut of the Navy." — Jones 
Manuscripts, Library of Congress. 

2. Nicholson, while at times displaying con- 
spicuous bravery, was less fortunate in his 
naval service than Hopkins. Two frigates un- 
der his command were at different times cap- 
tured by the enemy. On May 1, 1777, Con- 
gress suspended him from his command, "until 
he shall have made such satisfaction as shall 
be accepted by the executive powers of the 
state of Maryland, for the disrespectful and 
contemptuous letter written by him to the 
governor of that state. " — Journals of Continen- 
nental Congress, May 1, 1777. 



126 A^avy of tJie American Revolution 

the relative rank of army and naval officers 
as follows:^ 

Admiral, with General. 

Vice-Admiral, with Lieutenant-General. 

Rear-Admiral, with Major-General. 

Commodore, with Brigadier-General. 

Captain of a ship of 40 guns and up- 
wards, wuth Colonel. 

Captain of a ship of 20 to 40 guns, with 
Lieutenant-Colonel. 

'Captain of a ship of 10 to 20 guns, with 
Major. 

Lieutenant of the navy, with Captain. 

In this legislation on rank once more the 
influence of British models is apparent. 
The Committee was evidently building for 
the future, for the four higher ranks were 
not established at this time, nor during the 
Revolution. The present relative rank of 
army and naval officers is based on the 
above table. 

On March 23, 1776, Congress passed most 
important resolutions supplementary to 
those of November 25, 1775, concerning cap- 
tures and the shares of prizes. The resolu- 
tions of November 25 legalized the capture 
of the enemy's vessels of war and trans- 
ports. The new resolutions permitted for 
the first time the capture of all ships and 
cargoes, ''belonging to any inhabitant, or 
inhabitants of Great Britain, taken on the 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, No- 
vember 15, 1776. 



Xaz'y of the A;i:erica)i Revolution 12^ 

hi^h seas, or between high and low water 
mark/' by American privateers, vessels of 
the Continental navy, or ships fitted out by 
any of the colonies. In brief, the new 
resolutions legalized reprisals on British 
commerce. In the case of Continental ves- 
sels, one-third of the prize went to the offi- 
cers and crew; in the case of privateers, the 
whole of the prize fell to the owners and cap- 
tors. Each colony was permitted to fix the 
shares of the proceeds of merchantmen cap- 
tured by its own ships of war.^ On Octo- 
ber 30, 1776, the share of prizes taken by 
vessels of the Continental navy was in- 
creased to one-half of merchantmen, trans- 
ports, and store ships; and to the whole of 
ships of war and privateers.^ 

On April 2, 1776, Congress agreed to a 
form of commission for privateers. On 
the next day it resolved to send blank com- 
missions, signed by the President of Con- 
gress, to the legislatures, provincial con- 
gresses, and committees of safety of the 
United Colonies. These were to be filled 
out and delivered to privateersmen. Blank 
bonds, which were to be executed by the 
owners or masters of privateers, were also 
sent. These bonds, which prescribed a pen- 
alty of five or ten thousand dollars, accord- 
ing to the size of the ship, were intended to 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, March 
23, 1776. 

2. Ibid., October 30, 1776. 



128 Naz'y of the Americaii Revolution 

discourage or prevent misconduct and un- 
warrantable acts on the part of officers and 
crews. Congress also drafted a form of in- 
structions to the commanders of priva- 
teers.* 

Congress on November 15, 1776, estab- 
lished a new pay-table. Officers were now 
divided into three classes, those serving on 
board of vessels of 20 guns and upwards, 
vessels of 10 to 20 guns, and vessels below 
10 guns. The vessels of the first two 
classes were commanded by captains, and 
of the third class by lieutenants. The pay 
of the higher officers, which the new table 
generally raised, varied for each of the 
three classes, the commanding officers of 
which received, respectively, $60, $48, and 
$30 a month. Seamen were now paid a 
monthly wage of $8. The pay of officers 
below the captain ranged from $30 to $8.34 
a month. A bounty of $20 for every cannon 
and $8 for every seaman captured on board 
a British ship of war was now voted.^ On 
July 25, 1777, the "subsistence'' of officers 
while ill foreign or domestic ports was 
fixed.^ On January 19, 1778, Congress re- 
solved that officers not in actual service 
should be allowed pay, but not rations. 
While prisoners of war, their allowance 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, April 
2, April 3, 1776. 

2. Ibid., November 15, 1776. 

3. Ibid., July 25, 1777. 



Navy of the American Revolution 129 

for rations was to be diminished by the 
value of the supplies which they received 
from the enemy.^ Pursers for vessels of 
16 guns and upwards were authorized on 
November 14, 1778.^ 

Additional interest attaches to the initial 
legislation on pensions of the American gov- 
ernment because of the unprecedented liber- 
ality which now marks its treatment of its 
veterans. The first legislation on naval 
pensions dates from the adoption by Con- 
gress on November 28, 1775, of a form of 
naval contract according to which certain 
bounties were granted officers, seamen, and 
marines disabled from earning a livelihood.^ 
These bounties were derived from the 
proceeds of prizes captured by the aid of 
the beneficiaries. A more typical pension 
law was passed on August 26, 1776.^ It 
had, however, a vital defect in that it was 
left to the enforcement of the individual 
states. According to its provisions every 
naval officer, seaman, or marine, ''belonging 
to the United States of America, who shall 
lose a limb in any engagement in which no 
prize shall be taken, or be therein otherwise 
so disabled as to be rendered incapable of 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Janu- 
ary 19, March 20, 1778. 

2. Ibid., November 14, 1778. 

3. See Chapter I, page 46. 

4. Journals of Continental Congress, August 
26, 1776. This law applied to both the army 
and the navy. 



I 



130 Navy of the American Revolution 

getting a livelihood, shall receive during 
his life, or the continuance of such disability, 
one half of his monthly pay." When a 
prize was captured at the time the disabil- 
ity was contracted, the disabled person's 
share of prize money was considered as a part 
of his half-pay. If the disabled person was 
rendered incapable of serving in the navy, 
although not totally disabled from earning 
a livelihood, he received a monthly sum, 
judged to be adequate by the legislature of 
the state in which he resided. Each state 
was to determine which of its citizens were 
entitled to a pension under this law, to pay 
such persons their half-pay or allowance, and 
to make a quarterly report of its work to the 
secretary of Congress. The distinguishing 
characteristic of the law lay in its depend- 
ence on the states for its enforcement. As 
might be expected, it was very imperfectly 
carried out. 

On September 25, 1778, Congress extend- 
ed the advantages of the law to all persons 
whose disabilities were acquired previous 
to August 26, 1776.1 It is to be carefully 
noted that this was a pension for disabil- 
ities and not for service — a fundamental 
classification in pension law. An agita- 
tion for a service pension for life for the of- 
ficers of the army was made in and out of 
Congress for a long time, until in 1780 it 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep- 
tember 25, 1778. 



Navy of the American Revolution 131 

was at last successful.^ Such emoluments 
were not at this time granted to naval offi- 
cers ; it was probably argued that their shar- 
ing in captured prizes offset the pensions of 
the army officers. Then, too, the army had 
ways of gaining the attention of Congress 
that the weak and insignificant navy did 
not possess. 

Few more important duties fall to naval 
offices than the enforcing of discipline in the 
navy by means of naval courts. Adams's 
rules of November 28, 1775, made provision 
for holding courts-martial, but not courts of 
enquiry, which are a sort of grand jury or 
inquest. They also provided that courts- 
martial should consist of at least six naval 
officers, with six officers of marines, if so 
many of the latter were convenient to the 
court.^ The Committee and Navy Boards 
at times found it impossible to assemble so 
many officers. No definite procedure in 
investigating the loss of vessels was 
prescribed by Adams's rules. Additional 
legislation was therefore demanded. On 
May 6, 1778, Congress adopted new reg- 
ulations on naval courts, which were to be 
operative for one year.^ They provided 
that, wh en a vessel of war was lost by cap- 

1. Harvard Historical Studies, X, L. C. 
Hatch, Administration of American Revolu- 
tionary Army, Chapter V, Pay and Half-pay. 

2. See Chapter I, page 45. 

3. Journals of Continental Congress, May 
6, 1778. 



I 



132 Navy of the American Revolution 

ture or otherwise, a court of enquiry should 
be held, ''consisting of that navy board 
which shall, by the marine committee of 
Congress, be directed to proceed therein, 
or any three persons that such navy board 
may appoint." If the court of enquiry 
found that the loss of the vessel was caused 
by the neghgence or malconduct of any com- 
missioned officer, the Navy Board might 
suspend such officer pending his trial by a 
court-martial, which, in the event that six 
naval officers could not be assembled, was 
to consist of five men appointed by the 
Navy Board. The permitting of civilians 
to sit upon naval courts is the salient fea- 
ture of these new resolutions, and is an 
anomaly in naval judicature. They also 
provided that in cases where one or more 
vessels out of a fleet were lost by capture or 
otherwise, the commanders of the escaping 
vessels were to be tried by a similar proced- 
ure. If a court-martial found that the loss 
of a vessel was caused by the cow^ardice or 
treach-ery of the commanding officer, it was 
directed to inflict the death penalty. On 
August 19, 1778, the procedure established 
on May 6 was extended to **all offences and 
misdemeanors in the marine department."^ 
The proceedings of courts-martial were for- 
warded to the Marine Committee, which 
laid them, together with its recommenda- 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Au- 
gust 19, 1778. 



i 



jXavy of the American Revolution 133 

tions thereupon, before Congress for final 
action. 

During the incumbency of the Marine 
Committee a number of interesting and im- 
portant naval trials were held. Captain 
Thomas Thompson in 1778 and Captain 
Dudley Sal tons tall in 1779 were broken by 
courts-martial. Other captains who lost 
their vessels were tried, but escaped so se- 
vere a punishment. The cases growing 
out of Conimodore Hopkins's expedition to 
New Providence, his engagement with the 
''Glasgow," and the immediately succeed- 
ing events of his fleet in the spring of 1776 
deserve more extended notice. During the 
summer of 1776 the Marine Committee or- 
dered Commodore Hopkins and Captains 
Dudley Saltonstall and Abraham Whipple 
to leave the fleet, which was then stationed 
in Rhode Island, and to come to Philadel- 
phia for trial. After calling before it the 
inferior officers of the ' 'Alfred' ' and "Co- 
lumbus," and hearing their complaints 
against the two captains, the Committee 
reported to Congress on July 11 that the 
charge against Captain Saltonstall was not 
well founded, and that the charge against 
Captain Whipple "amounts to nothing more 
than a rough, indelicate mode of behaviour 
to his marine officers." Congress ordered 
the two captains to repair to their com- 
mands, and recommended Captain Whipple 



i 



134 Ncivy of the American Revolution 

''to cultivate harmony with his officers."^ 
Commodore Hopkins was not to get off so 
easily. His whole conduct since he left 
Philadelphia early in January, 1776, was in- 
vestigated. The principal charge against 
him was the disobeying of the instructions 
of the Naval Committee of January 5, 1776, 
to attack the forces of the enemy in the re- 
gion of Virginia and the Carolinas. Hop- 
kins based his defence on the statement 
that the enemy in that region had become 
too strong to attack by the time his fleet 
had sailed on February 17, and also on a cer- 
tain clause in his instructions granting him 
discretionary powers.^ After the Marine 
Committee had investigated the case, and 
reported upon it, Congress, on August 12, 
took into consideration the ''instructions 
given to Commodore Hopkins, his examina- 
tion and answers to the Marine Committee, 
and the report of the Marine Committee 
thereupon; also, the farther defence by him 
made, and the testimony of the witnesses." 
On the 15th, Congress came to the resolu- 
tion: "That the said commodore Hopkins, 
during his cruise to the southward, did not 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
11, 1776. 

2. Edward Field's Esek Hopkins, 154-56, 
quotes words of Hopkins in his own defence. 
Washington feared the plan of the Naval Com- 
mittee would fail as the enemy must know it, 
so long had the fleet been fitting for sea. — Ford, 
¥/ritings of Washington, IH, -319. 



Navy of the American Revolution 135 

pay due regard to the tenor of his instruc- 
tions and, that his reasons 

for not going from Providence immediately 
to the Carolinas, are by no means satisfac- 
tory." The next day Congress resolved, 
*'that the said conduct of commodore Hop- 
kins deserves the censure of this house, and 
this house does accordingly censure him."^ 

This a-ction seems more severe than the 
facts justify. John Adams, who defended 
Hopkins, had with difficulty prevented Con- 
gress from cashiering the Commodore. Ac- 
cording to Adams's view, Hopkins was 
"pursued and persecuted by that anti-New- 
England spirit which haunted Congress in 
many other of their proceedings, as well as 
in this case."^ The action of Congress may 
be interpreted differently. Hopkins had 
not met the expectations of Congress or the 
Marine Committee. As the head of the 
fleet, blame naturally fell upon him, whether 
he deserved it or not. He had his short- 
comings as a naval officer, and failure mag- 
nified them. By placing the blame upon 
him, the skirts of Congress, of the Marine 
Committee, and of the other naval officers 
were cleared, and the hopes of a few self-in- 
terested men were brightened. 

Commodore Hopkins's failure to carry 
out the plans of the Marine Committee dur- 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Au 
gust 12, 15, and 16, 1776. 

2. Quoted in Field's Esek Hopkins, 158. 



136 Navy of the American Revolution 

ing the fall of 1776, together with the par- 
tial inaction of the fleet under his command, 
increased his disfavor with Congress and the 
Marine Committee. His praiseworthy en- 
deavors to man and prepare his fleet for sea 
won for him the enmity of the owners of pri- 
vateers at Providence, for his success would 
mean the taking of men and materials sorely 
needed by the privateersmen. Hopkins's 
intemperate language, lack of tact, and na- 
val misfortunes bred a spirit of discontent, 
and gave an excuse for insubordination 
among his inferior officers. Encouraged 
by the discontented privateersmen of Prov- 
idence, ten of the inferior officers of the 
^'Warren,'' the Commodore's flagship, signed 
a petition and certain letters containing 
complaints and charges against Hopkins, 
and sent their documents to the Marine 
Committee. They were taken to Philadel- 
phia by the chief "conspirator," Captain 
John Grannis of the marines. These docu- 
ments asserted that Hopkins had called 
the members of the Marine Committee and 
of Congress " ignorant fellows — lawyers, 
clerks — persons who don't know how to gov- 
ern men;'' that he was ''remarkably addict- 
ed to profane swearing;" that he had ''treat- 
ed prisoners in a most inhuman and barbar- 
ous manner;" that he was a "hindrance to 
the proper manning of the fleet;" and that 
"his conversation is at times so wild and or- 
ders so unsteady that I have sometimes 



J 



A'avy of the American Revolution 137 

thought he was not in his right mind." Be- 
sides these accusations, there were a few 
others of even less substantial character.^ 

On March 25, 1777, the Marine Commit- 
tee laid before Congress the complaints and 
charges against Commodore Hopkins, and 
on the next day Congress took them into 
consideration; whereupon it resolved that 
"Esek Hopkins be immediately, and he is 
hereby, suspended from his command in the 
American navy."^ Hopkins remained sus- 
pended until January 2, 1778. The Jour- 
nals of Congress for this date contain the 
following entry: ' 'Congress having no far- 
ther occasion for the service of Esek Hop- 
kins, esq. who, on the 22nd of December, 
1775, was appointed commander in chief of 
the fleet fitted out by the naval committee, 
Resolved, That the said Esek Hopkins, esq. 
be dismissed from the service of the United 
States.';^ 

Hopkins's suspension and removal did not 
in any way improve the navy. Indeed, it 
was far less fortunate in 1777, than it had 
been in 1776. That its chief officer 
should have been suspended without 
a hearing, on flimsy charges, offered by a 
small number of inferior officers whose leader 



1. Edward Field's Esek Hopkins, Chapter 
VI, Conspiracy and Dismissal, contains many 
original documents. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, March 
25, March 26, 1777. 

3. Ibid., January 2, 1778. 



138 Navy of the American Revolution 

was guilty of insubordination, convicts Con- 
gress of acting with undue haste and of do- 
ing a possible injustice, and arouses the sus- 
picion that it was not actuated wholly by a 
calm and unbiased judgment. The word- 
ing of Hopkins's dismissal seems needlessly 
curt, and harsh. Since Hopkins had lost 
the confidence of Congress, the Marine 
Committee, and many of his countrymen, 
his removal from the office of commander- 
in-chief to that of a captain might have 
been justified. 

On January 13, 1778, Hopkins brought a 
suit for libel against the ten officers con- 
cerned in the ^'conspiracy,'' fixing his dam- 
ages at £10,000. On July 30 Congress 
passed a resolution for defraying the rea- 
sonable expenses of the ten officers in de- 
fending their suit.^ The case was tried be- 
fore a jury in the Inferior Court of Common 
Pleas of Rhode Island. The decision was 
unfavorable to Hopkins, as the jury brought 
in a verdict for ''the defendants and their 
costs." The victory of the opposition to 
the Commodore was complete. He had not, 
however, lost the confidence of his fellow 
townsmen. He served in the General As- 
sembly of his state, representing North 
Providence from 1777 until 1786, and he 
was from 1777 until the end of the Revolu- 
tion a member of the Rhode Island Council 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
30, 1778. 



Navy of the American Revolution 139 

of War.^ No one who knew Hopkins inti- 
mately ever doubted his courage, his patriot- 
ism, or his honesty of purpose. 

The arrival off the Delaware Capes, on 
July 8, 1778, of twelve sail of the line and 
four frigates under the command of Count 
D'Estaing, Vice-Admiral of France, threw 
additional work upon the Naval Depart- 
ment. No sooner did the Marine Commit- 
tee learn of the presence of the French, than 
it exerted itself to supply the table of its 
naval guests with eatables and drinkables. 
Casks of fresh water, several hundred barrels 
of bread and flour, and a small supply of 
fresh provisions, were at once sent to the 
Count, and the Committee ordered a com- 
missary to collect for the use of the French 
fleet fifty bullocks, seven hundred sheep, a 
number of poultry, and a quantity of vege- 
tables. After the ill-starred expedition 
against Rhode Island in August, 1778, when 
the French fleet put into Boston for repairs, 
its provisioning again became a care to the 
Naval Department. The Marine Commit- 
tee ordered three thousand barrels of flour 
to be sent on from Albany for the use of 
the French.^ 

The distinction of having performed the 
first work of a consular bureau in the United 



1. Edward Field's Esek Hopkins, 237-38. 

2. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com- 
mittee to Count D'Estaing, July 12, July 17 
1778. 



140 Navy of the American Revolution 

States belongs to the Marine Committee, 
since it had charge of the pubUcation and 
record of the first consular appointments to 
this country. In accordance with the first 
commercial treaty between the United - 
States and France, Gerard, the French 
minister, soon after his arrival in America 
in July, 1778, appointed John Holker, con- 
sul for the port of Philadelphia, and in Sep- 
tember named a vice-consul for the same 
place. The latter appointment Congress re- 
ferred to the Marine Committee ''in order 
that the same may be made public.'' A 
similar disposition was made of the appoint- 
ments of consuls for Maryland, South Caro- 
lina, and Boston, and of the vice-consuls for 
Alexandria (Virginia), and Virginia. In the 
case of the vice-consul for Virginia, Congress 
ordered the Marine Committee to ''cause 
the commission of Mr. d' Annemours to be 
recorded in the book by them kept for that 
purpose, and his appointment made known 
to all concerned." The Committee was in- 
strumental in obtaining the settling of the 
powers and duties of consuls as regards the 
United States and France. On August 2, 
1779, the control of consular affairs was re- 
moved from the Marine Committee and vest- 
ed in the Secretary of Congress.^ 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
23, September 24, October 27, November 4, 
1778; January 21, June 7, 22, 23, July 30, 
August 2, 1779. 



CHAPTER V 

THE CONDITIONS OF THE CONTINENTAL 
NAVAL SERVICE 

The nineteenth century worked its mar- 
vels on sea as well as on land. The progress 
of invention, the discovery of new sources 
of wealth and power in nature and in man, 
and the development of powerful states, 
have revolutionized transportation and com- 
munication by sea, maritime pursuits, and 
naval science. Commerce has found fleeter 
wings; and it no longer waits on the caprice 
of Aeolus. Countless steamships with enor- 
mous tonnage and high rates of speed have 
in large measure supplanted the small, snail- 
like sailing craft of our fathers. The haz- 
ards of sea-going trade have been greatly 
reduced. Invention has pacified Neptune's 
fierce temper. The breed of pirates and 
corsairs has been exterminated by the long 
muscular arm of the modern state. The pri- 
vations of ocean-travel which were distress- 
ing accompaniments of the colonial per- 
iod in America, were succeeded about the 
middle of the last century by the comforts 
of the first steamships, and these within the 



142 Navy of the American Revolution ' 

memory of young men have yielded to the 
luxuries of the floating palaces of the sea. 

Complementary to these transformations 
in commerce, navigation, and travel by sea, 
have come improved methods of their de- 
fence. Modern naval science in all of its as- 
pects has been developed. Glancing for a 
moment in retrospect at the long line of na- 
val progress, one sees it pass from the an- 
cient row-galleys, to the sailing ship of the i 
early Modern Age, and from thence to the i 
steamships of to-day. The motive power 
has changed from human muscle to wind, 
and from wind to steam. Placed beside the 
iron-clad battleships, the light, wooden 
frigates of the Revolution look almost as 
antiquated as the Greek galley with its fig- 
ured prow. Smart, trim, beautiful vessels 
were the Revolutionary craft, but how small, 
simple, and crude they now appear. In- 
deed, a new type of poet, one who loves raw 
force first, and the picturesque afterwards, 
has risen to sing the glories of new navies 
and new seas. 

Other naval changes have been made, as 
significant as those in style of vessel and mo- 
tive power. Ships of war now wear heavy 
coats-of-mail. The "great guns" and the 
''long guns" of the Revolution are neither 
great nor long beside modern cannon. A 
new type of sea officer has been trained to 
meet the new conditions of naval service. 
It would puzzle a modern officer to take a 



A'avy of the American Revolution 143 

schooner from Boston to Plymouth, for his 
seamanship is now fitted to steamships. 
By over-study of modern armament, tor- 
pedo boats, and the latest naval manoeuvres, 
his 'leather eye" has lost something of its 
skill for reading in the skies the coming of 
storms or sunshine. Trim and immaculate 
in their uniforms, the American naval offi- 
cers of to-day, who have entered the naval 
profession by the way of their technical 
studies at Annapolis, little resemble their 
hardy prototypes in the Continental navy, 
to whom clung the barnacles of their ap- 
prenticeship aboard merchantmen. 

Notwithstanding this revolution in naval 
science, a consideration of the conditions of 
the Continental naval service and of the 
naval policy of the Marine Committee has to- 
day a practical value for naval experts. 
Certain fundamental principles in naval 
science do not change. Captain Mahan, in 
his ''Influence of Sea Power upon History, " 
has pointed out that, while naval tactics 
vary with the improvements in the motive 
power and armament of fleets, the basic prin- 
ciples of naval strategy do not. They are as 
enduring as the order of nature. For ex- 
ample, one cannot conceive that there will 
come a time when an inversion will be made 
of the strategic principle, that an enemy 
should be struck at his weak point. Cap- 
tain Mahan even finds it worth while, for the 
benefit of his fellow-experts, to set forth with 



144 ^'Cii'y of the American Revolution 

some detail the naval strategy of the Car- 
thaginian wars. 

When America, in these first years of the 
twentieth century, makes an invoice of her 
resources, she counts first her great prairies 
of the Mississippi basin, her rich mines of 
the Alleghanies and Rockies, and her wealth 
of manufactories and their products. In 
1775 her assets w^ere of a different sort. 
America then- was a mere strip of seacoast, 
cut into a series of peninsulas by the lower 
courses of a number of navigable rivers. 
Her interests and her wealth then were much 
more largely maritime than now. Atten- 
tion^has already been directed to the wide 
pursuit of commerce, shipbuilding, fishing, 
and whaling in New England. It remains 
to be said that in the Middle and Southern 
colonies commerce and shipbuilding were 
important industries. During the Revolu- 
tion Virginia put more naval ships afloat 
than any other colony. In the colonial 
period communication between the towns 
of the colonies was best by water. The in- 
habitants of America, during this period, 
were amphibious. They have lost this 
quality, for their character is now fixed by 
the ''West," and not by the Atlantic sea- 
board. In 1775 America had, relatively, 
many more seamen than in 1898. 

In the light of these facts it seems some- 
what singular that the Revolutionary navy 
was forced to spend most of its days in port, 



Navy of the American Revolution 145 

vainly trying to enlist seamen for its de- 
pleted crews. To be sure the lack of suffi- 
cient armament, naval stores, and provis- 
ions was felt, but it was the lack of sailors 
that constituted the chief obstacle to the 
success of the Continental navy. Those 
vessels that finally weighed anchor were 
wanting as a rule in this prime naval requi- 
site. The same causes that prevented seamen 
from enlisting lowered the quality of those 
that did enlist, and kept them from enter- 
ing for longer than a single cruise. A 
ship's complement of sailors was often ill- 
assorted. Seamen were improvised from 
landsmen; captured British seamen were 
coaxed into service; and for one cause or 
another many nationalities at times shipped 
side by side. These conditions made for 
insubordination, and even mutiny. On one 
occasion seventy or eighty British sailors, 
who were enlisted on board the Continental 
frigate ''Alliance,'^ bound for France, plan- 
ned to mutiny and carry the frigate into an 
English port. In order to obtain seamen 
many measures were resorted to by Con- 
gress, the states, the Marine Committee, 
Navy Boards, and commanders of vessels. 
Premiums for importing seamen were given 
to foreigners;^ wages were advanced to 
recruits;^ attempts were made to place em- 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, April 
17, 1776. 

2. Ibid., March 29, 1777. 



146 Navy of the American Revolution 

bargoes upon privateers;^ bounties were 
paid to seamen enlisting for a year;^ induce- 
ments were offered to those captured from 
the enemy to get them to enter the Ameri- 
can service;^ some seamen w^ere impressed; 
glowing advertisements were inserted in 
the public prints;^ and broadsides, which 

1. Rhode Island Colonial Records, VIII, 
53. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
11, 1780. 

3. Ibid., August 5, 1776. 

4. In July, 1778, when a joint American 
and French attack on Newport was planned, 
the Navy Board at Boston inserted a notice 
in the Providence Gazette, requiring sailors 
who were enlisted to repair to their vessels, 
and calHng for recruits. This call was in the 
following language: "All seamen now in 
America, who regard the Liberty of Mankind, 
or the Honor of the United States of America, 
as well as their own advantage, are now ear- 
nestly entreated to enter immediately on 
board some of the Continental Vessels, in 
order to afford all possible Aid and Assistance 
to His Most Christian Majesty's Fleet, under 
the Command of the Count de Estaing, the 
Vice-Admiral of France, now in the American 
Seas, for the Purpose of assisting these Ameri- 
can States in vanquishing a haughty and 
cruel Enemy, too long triumphant on these 
Seas. Now is the Time to secure to your- 
selves Safety in your future Voyages, and to 
avoid the cruelties which all those experience 
who have the Misfortune to be captured by 
the Britons; and now is the time to make your 
Fortunes." — Providence Gazette, July 25, 
1778. See also advertisement in Connecticut 
Gazette, March 7, 1777. 



I 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 147 

cleverly recited the many advantages of the 
Continental service, were displayed in sun- 
dry taverns.^ 

All these efforts were defeated by the se- 
ductive allurements of privateering. The 
Revolutionary Congress was poor and paid 
poor wages. After its seamen had enlisted, 
they were toled away by mercenary priva- 
teersmen. These same privateersmen were 
accused of taking the naval stores and the 
artisans of Congress in order to fit out their 
own ships. The owners and commanders 
of privateers, as they received the whole 
of their captures, could afford to treat their 
crews liberally. It was generally asserted 
that they paid higher wages than did Con- 
gress or the states. Privateering was more 
popular, more elastic, and more irregular 
than the other naval services. When no 
one was looking, parts of cargoes could more 
readily be appropriated for private use 
without waiting the tedious process of 
the admiralty courts. Privateersmen could 
devote all their time and energy to com- 
merce-destroying, unfettered by the miscel- 



1. A facsimile of a most interesting and 
rare broadside will be found in C. K. Bolton's 
Private Soldier under Washington, page 46. 
This broadside was designed to attract re- 
cruits to the ship "Ranger," Captain John 
Paul Jones, fitting out in the summer of 1777 
at Portsmouth, New Hampshire, to sail for 
France. 



148 Navy of the American Revolution 

laneous duties which often fell to naval 
ships. 

The backbone of the privateering interest 
was in New England. Silas Deane said in 
1785 that four out of every five of the pri- 
vateers of the Revolution came from the 
states north and east of the Delaware river. 
This probably overstates the proportion in 
favor of the northern states.^ Pennsylvania 
and Maryland did considerable business, but 
farther to the southward the industry was 
less flourishing. The Virginia privateers did 
little. Massachusetts sent out one-third of 
all the privateers. From 1777 until 1783, 
inclusive, the Massachusetts Council issued 
998 commissions. In 1779, 184 prizes cap- 
tured by privateers were libelled in the 
three admiralty courts of this state. The 
average burden of these captured vessels 
was one hundred tons. Rhode Island's 
best year was probably in 1776, when thirty- 
eight vessels were libelled at Providence. 
A list of 202 privateers has been made out 
for Connecticut. In 1779 twenty-nine ves- 
sels taken from the British by privateers 
were libelled in the Pennsylvania court of 
admiralty. During the last six years of the 
war Maryland issued about 250 commissions. 
Boston was the chief center for fitting out 
privateers and for selling their prizes, al- 



]. Collections of New York Historical So- 
ciety, Deane Papers, V, 466. 



Navy of the American Revolution 149 

though towns like Salem and Marblehead 
did a thriving business/ 

Not a few of the failures and misfortunes 
of the Continental navy are to be laid at 
the doors of the Yankee privateersmen, 
whose love for Mammon exceeded that for 
their country .^ A more patriotic course 
was to have been expected of certain sub- 
stantial merchants who embarked in the 
business of commerce-destroying. But on 
the other hand, one might easily be too 
severe on many bold, simple, seafaring folk. 
The war, which deprived them of their 
gainful pursuits at sea, now pointed the 
way, as a recompense, to a new and attrac- 
tive calling. Wives and babies were still 
to be fed, and plans for sweethearts to be 
realized. The new trade was as alluring as 
a lottery. Had not a neighbor drawn a 
competence sufficient for almost a lifetime 

1. For additional information and appro- 
priate references concerning privateers, see 
Part II, State Navies. 

2. There is much evidence on this point. 
See especially PubHcations of Rhode Island 
Historical Society, VIII, 256, William Ver- 
non, Commissioner of Navy Board at Boston, 
to John Adams, December 17, 1778; Force, 
American Archives, 5th, II, 1105, John Paul 
Jones to Robert Morris, October 17, 1776; 
Ibid., 599, Mrs. John Adams to John Adams, 
September 29, 1776; Ibid., 337 and 622; Ibid., 
5th, III, 1513, Benjamin Rush to R. H. Lee, 
December 21, 1776; and C. K. Bolton, Private 
Soldier under Washington, 45, 46. 



150 N'avy of the American Revolution 

by a successful haul of the enemy's rich 
West Indiamen? It was true that another 
neighbor, who but recently sailed proudly 
for sea with women-folk waving a last 
good-bye, now languished in a prison-ship 
off New York, or was starving in the old 
Mill prison at Plymouth, England. "But 
then a man must take his chances," each 
privateersman argued, ''and it may be I, 
who by a fortunate cruise shall bring home 
enough Jamaica rum to fairly float my 
schooner, and every pint of it is as good as 
gold coin." 

Due credit must always be given to the 
hardy and venturesome privateersmen for 
supplying the army and navy with the 
sinews of war, which they captured. To be 
sure, if Congress or the states wished their 
captured property, it was to be had by pay- 
ing a good round price for it in the open 
market. Even here the government's agents 
sometimes suspected collusions between the 
buyers and the agents of the captors to run 
up prices to the disadvantage of the govern- 
ment.^ The privateersmen were engaged 

1. In the case of Continental prizes the 
Navy Board at Boston discovered collusions 
which were detrimental to the government. 
Ordered to buy the Continental prize "Thorn," 
it writes to the Marine Committee that the 
agents and captains interested in the prize 
refuse to let it have the "Thorn" at a price 
to be fixed by three disinterested appraisers; 
and that "taking our chance, in the purchase 
by auction, amongst such circles of men in com- 



Navy of the American Revolution 151 

not in patriotic, but business ventures. 
Could one-half of this irregular service have 
been enlisted in the Continental and state 
navies, the other half could not have been 
better employed than in its work of distress- 
ing the enemy's commerce, transports, and 
small letters of marque. Zealous eulogists 
of the privateers have overrun the cup of 
their merit. They have not always pointed 
out that the number of American priva- 
teers, merchantmen, fishermen, and whale- 
men captured by British privateers and 
small naval craft was comparable to the 
number of similar British vessels taken by 
the American privateers. The prison ships 
and naval prisons of the enemy at New 
York, in Canada, the British West Indies, 
and England were at times crowded with 
Americans captured at sea.^ A few of these 
men England enlisted in her navy; and v/ith 
others she manned a whaling-fleet for the 
coast of Brazil composed of seventeen ves- 
sels. It is, however, worthy of note that 

binationsis a miserable one. " In the same letter 
the Board writes also concerning the "Thorn" 
that "bets run high that she will sell for 
two hundred thousand pounds." — Records 
and Papers of Continental Congress, 37, pp. 
145, 147. 

1. See Chapter IX, page 267; also Gomer 
Williams, Liverpool Privateers, Chapter IV, 
Privateers of the American War of Independ- 
ence. From August, 1778, to April, 1779, Liver- 
pool fitted out one hundred and twenty pri- 
vateers. 



152 A'az'y of the America )i Revolution 

the supplies captured from the British were 
often almost indispensable to the colonists; 
while similar captures made by the British 
had to the captors little value. 

Another factor in the naval situation 
of the Americans was the existence of 
state navies in Massachusetts, Rhode 
Island, Connecticut,. New York, Penn- 
sylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Caro- 
lina, and South Carolina, The fleet of 
Massachusetts, comprising sixteen armed 
vessels, was the most active and effect- 
ive of the state fleets. The Virginia navy 
numbering about fifty vessels was poorly 
equipped and rendered little service. These 
fleets were made up of all sorts of naval 
craft; sailing vessels variously rigged, 
fire-ships, floating batteries, barges, row- 
galleys with and without sails, half-galleys, 
and boats of all sizes. Most of this craft 
was designed for the defence of coasts, 
rivers, and towns. This was especially true 
of the galleys, which were shallow vessels, 
some seventy or eighty feet in length, carry- 
ing two or three cannon, sometimes as large 
as 36's or 42's. Only some sixty of these 
vessels of the state navies were well adapted 
for deep-sea navigation.^ 

To a limited extent both privateers and 
state vessels were placed at the service of 
the Marine Committee. There were cruises, 
expeditio us, and defences of towns, in which 

1. See Part II, State Navies. 



Navy of the American Revolution 153 

two, or the three, services participated. In 
such cases the senior Continental captain 
was regularly the ranking officer, or the com- 
modore of the fleet, as it was then expressed. 
To the extent that state vessels and priva- 
teers might be concerted with the Continen- 
tal vessels, it would seem at first blush 
that they undoubtedly were elements of 
naval strength to the Marine Committee. 
This was by no means true. These con- 
certed expeditions proved disappointing, 
and when too late the Committee became 
wary of them. Proper subordination, upon 
which naval success so much depends, could 
not be obtained in these mixed fleets. The 
commander of a state vessel or the master 
of a privateer, for aught either could see, 
subtended as large an angle in maritime 
affairs, as an officer of Congress, which 
body was to them nebulous, uncertain, and 
irresolute. 

If the location and physical form of colo- 
nial America with reference to the sea 
tended to develop a maritime people, they 
also made most difficult the problems of 
naval defence. As has been pointed out, 
the territory of the revolting colonies com- 
prised a narrow band of seacoast divided 
into a number of peninsulas. All the large 
towns were seaports. Had the peninsulas 
been islands, their defence against the great 
sea-power of England would have been an 
impossibility. The connections by land on 



154 A'oz'A' ^f ^^'^ American Revolution 

the west side of the thirteen colonies gave 
Washington a most valuable line of commun- 
ications from Canada to Florida. Had the 
revolting territory lain compactly, approach- 
ing a square in shape, with a narrow front- 
age on the sea, its naval defence would have 
been a simple problem. 

Having decided late in 1775 to make a 
naval defence, Congress early in 1776 took 
into consideration the establishing of one 
or more bases for naval operations.^ There 
were needed one or more strongly fortified 
ports where the Continental fleet and its 
prizes would be comparatively secure from 
attack, and where the armed vessels could 
equip, man, and refit. The ports best 
adapted for naval stations were Boston, 
New York, Philadelphia, some point on or 
near the James river in Virginia, and Charles- 
ton, South Carolina. Lesser towns had 
their advocates and their hopes. In Feb- 
ruary, 1776, Gurdon Saltonstall of Connec- 
ticut wrote to Silas Deane that New London 
would be 'Hhe Asylum of Cont. Navey,^' 
for "one they must have of necessity.''^ 
The Southern ports were not available for 
several reasons, but chiefly on account of 
their distance from the center of maritime 
interests in New England. New York was 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, March 
23, 1776. 

2. Papers of Silas Deane in the Library of 
the Connecticut Historical Society. 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 155 

occupied by the British. Philadelphia had 
many points in its favor, not the least of 
which was the location there of Congress 
and the Marine Committee. Its occupation 
for a time by the enemy in 1777 and 1778, 
and the close w^atch which his armed vessels 
maintained at the mouth of Delaware Bay, 
greatly impaired its usefulness as a harbor 
of refuge for the Continental vessels. Bos- 
ton was by far the most available port. 
After its abandonment by the British in 
March, 1776, and the shifting of the theater 
of the war first to the Middle and later to 
the Southern states, it was left compara- 
tively free from British interference. It 
was the naval emporium of the Revolution, 
where naval stores, armament and equip- 
ment for vessels of war, seamen, and ships 
could be procured, if they were to be had 
at all. 

The British had naval bases in America 
that left little to be desired. When they 
seized New York in September, 1776, they 
obtained not only a military point of the 
highest strategic value, but also a secure 
naval station for fitting out and refitting 
their privateers and naval ships. From 
New York, centrally situated with reference 
to the revolting colonies, their vessels pro- 
ceeded along the Atlantic coast both north- 
ward and southward on the outlook for 
American merchantmen, privateers, and 
naval craft. Their favorite patrolling 



156 Maz'y of the America]! Revolution 

grounds were off the entrances of Delaware, 
Chesapeake, and Narragansett bays. Brit- 
ish vessels were also to be found off 
Boston Bay, Ocracoke Inlet, Cape Fear, 
Charleston, and Savannah. The British 
occupation of Newport from 1776 to 1779, 
and of Savannah from 1778, and Charles- 
ton from 1780, to the end of the war, 
afforded other convenient stations for 
British operations against the shipping of 
the colonies. St. Augustine was a port of 
much importance in the movements of the 
enemy's smaller ships. The naval stations 
at Halifax, Jamaica, and the Bermudas, 
while not so convenient as those enumerated, 
were sources of naval strength to the Brit- 
ish. Halifax was a base for the naval oper- 
ations against New England. It scarcely 
needs to be said that the ports mentioned 
were in a way secondary bases of opera- 
tions, and that England's center for ships, 
seamen, and supplies of all sorts was the 
British Isles. 

From this account of the respective naval 
stations in America of the two combatants, 
one proceeds naturally to a comparison of 
their fleets. The rude naval craft of the 
Americans, two-thirds of which were made- 
over merchantmen, was outclassed by the 
vessels of the Royal Navy at every point. 
Disregarding the fleets of Washington and 
Arnold, there were during the Revolution 
fifty-six armed vessels in the American 



A^avy of the American Revolution 157 

navy, mounting on the average about twen- 
ty guns. The vessels in the British navy 
when the Revolution opened in 1775 num- 
bered 270, and when it closed, 468.^ Of this 
latter number, 174 were ships of the line, 
each mounting between sixty and one hun- 
dred guns. The naval force of the Ameri- 
cans when it was at its maximum in the 
fall of 1776 consisted of 27 ships, mounting 
on the average twenty guns.^ At the same 
time the British had on the American sta- 
tion, besides a number of small craft, 71 
ships, which mounted on the average twenty- 
eight guns.^ Of these, two were 64's; one, a 
60; seven, 50's; and three, 44's. The British 
vessels, being so much larger than the Amer- 
ican, were naturally armed with much heav- 
ier guns. Very few 18-pounders were to 
be found in the Continental navy. The fri- 
gates were usually mounted with 12's, 9's, 
and 6's; and many of the smaller craft with 
6's and 4's. The guns on the larger British 
ships mounted IS's, 24's, 32's, and 42's. 

An exhibition of figures showing the dif- 
ference in size between one of the largest of 

L Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 328. 

2. Few of these vessels were ready for sea 
for lack of crews. The British also suffered 
greatly during the Revolution owing to the 
scarcity of seamen. This the First Lord of 
the Admiralty attributed to the loss of 18,000 
American sailors, who had contributed to the 
manning of the British fleets in former wars. 
— Annual Register, 1778, 201. 

3. Boston Gazette, November 4, 1776. 



158 A^avy of the American Revolution 

the frigates built by the Marine Committee 
in 1776 and a typical 100-gmi ship of the 
line of the Royal Navy is interesting not 
only by way of comparison, but also as 
giving a notion of the size of Revolutionary 
naval craft. The figures in feet for the 
American 32-gun frigate, "Hancock," and 
for the British 100-gun ship, "Victo- 
ry,'' respectively, were as follows : Length 
of gun deck, 137 and 186; length of keel, 
116 and 151; width of beam, 34 and 52; 
depth, 12 and 22. The tonnage of the 
"Hancock's" companion frigate, the "Bos- 
ton," was 515 tons; of the "Alfred," the 
first ship fitted out by Congress, 200 tons.^ 
Continental naval craft, such as the 
"Cabot," "Wasp," and " Fly," were smaller 
still than the "Alfred." 

The number of seamen and marines in the 
Continental navy is believed not to have 
exceeded at any time three thousand men. 
The exact number of commissioned officers 
in the Continental navy- and marine corps 
may not as yet have been ascertained. 
Owing to the diffusion of the power of ap- 
pointment, the Naval Department of the 
Revolution seems to have prepared no per- 
fect list of its officers. The best list of 
commissioned officers, and one that in all 
probability needs few corrections was com- 

1. A battleship building in 1903 at the 
New York navy yard has a displacement of 
16,000 tons. 



Navy of the American Revolution 159 

piled in 1794 in the Auditor's Office, De- 
partment of the Treasury.^ This gives the 
names of 1 commander-in-chief, 45 captains, 
and 132 Heutenants, or 178 commissioned 
officers in all, in the navy proper; and 1 
major, 31 captains, and 91 lieutenants, or 
123 commissioned officers, in the marine 
corps. With the exception of the years 
1776 and 1777, when the total number of 
officers in actual service was about one-half 
of the above figures, the number of officers 
at sea or attached to vessels in ports was 
much less than one-half. In 1902 the Amer- 
ican navy consisted of 899 commissioned 
officers of the line, arranged in eight grades. 

In 1775 the British navy contained 18,000 
seamen and marines, and when the war 
closed in 1783 this number had risen to 
110,000. The total ''extra" and "ordi- 
nary" expenses of the Royal Navy from 
1775 to 1783, as voted by Parliament, 
amounted to £8,386,000.^ 

Both Continental and state naval services 
suffered from the lack of esprit de corps, 
naval traditions, and a proper subordina- 
tion and concert of action between officers 
and crews. Bravery is often a poor sub- 
stitute for organization and naval experi- 
ence and skill. Navies can be grown, but 
not created. The quality of the Continen- 



1. Manuscript list, in Division of Manu- 
scripts, Library of Congress. 

2. Clowes, Royal Navy, III, 327. 



i6o Navy of the American Revolution 

tal naval officers, diluted it is true by the 
presence of a few ''political skippers/' was 
upon the whole as high as the circum- 
stances of their choice and the naval ex- 
perience of the country admitted. Many 
of them were drawn from the merchant ser- 
vice, and a few had had some months' ex- 
perience in state navies. Six captains ap- 
pointed by Washington entered the service 
of the Marine Committee. 

The vessels of the Continental navy were 
procured and managed under several Con- 
tinental auspices. The Marine Committee, 
w^ithits predecessor and its successors in naval 
administration was the chief naval admin- 
istrative organ of the Revolutionary gov- 
ernment. We have already seen, however, 
that Washington fitted out one fleet in New 
England and another in New York; and 
that Arnold fought with still another fleet, 
one of the most important naval engage- 
ments of the Revolution. In a succeeding 
chapter we shall find that the American rep- 
resentatives in France, who were respon- 
sible to the Foreign Office of Congress, and 
the Continental agent at New Orleans, who 
worked chiefly under the Committee of 
Commerce, fitted out fleets, and were vested 
with important naval duties. At one and 
the same time three committees of Congress, 
the Marine Committee, the Committee of 
Foreign Affairs, and the Committee of Com- 
merce, were fitting out armed vessels. 






CHAPTER VI 

MOVEMENTS OF THE CONTINENTAL 

FLEET UNDER THE MARINE 

COMMITTEE 

Many duties fell to the Marine Committee 
and its fleet which were not of a purely 
military character. The Committee was 
'obliged to employ some of its vessels in 
keeping open the commercial and diplo- 
matic communications of the United States 
with Europe and the West Indies; upon 
this intercourse with foreign countries 
largely depended the successful issue of the 
war. The Committee detailed vessels to 
carry abroad ambassadors, and foreign 
agents; letters and dispatches; tobacco, fish, 
flour, indigo, and such other colonial pro- 
ducts as exchanged well for naval stores, 
clothing, and the munitions of war. Among 
the distinguished men who took passage on 
board the Continental vessels were John 
Adams, Lafayette, and Gerard, the first 
French minister to the United States. In 
this work it cooperated with other com- 
mittees of Congress, and most especially 



i62 A'avy of the American Revolution 

with the Committee of Secret Correspon- 
dence, or its successor, the Committee of 
Foreign Affairs; and with the Secret Com- 
mittee, or, as it was later called, the Com- 
mittee of Commerce. Owing to the close 
connection of the work of the Marine Com- 
mittee and the Committee of Commerce in 
exporting colonial products and in importing 
supplies, their accounts became inextric- 
ably confused. While running errands for 
the various administrative organs of Con- 
gress, the Marine Committee often at the 
same time ran errands of its own. A com- 
mander who had been selected to carry 
abroad a minister or foreign agent, might 
be ordered to pick up any prizes which fell- 
in his way, or to cruise for a brief period in 
European waters while waiting for letters 
and packets from Paris addressed to Con- 
gress; or if on the other hand, it was a 
voyage in which dispatch was of the highest 
importance, he would be specifically for- 
bidden to do these very things. 

Turning now to the strictly military work 
of the Committee, one finds that clearness 
in presentation will be obtained by making 
a classification of naval operations. These 
will be divided into primary and secondary 
operations. A primary operation will be 
defined as one directed against the enemy's 
naval vessels at sea. Any other naval opera- 
tion whatsoever will be called a secondary one. 
Primary operations will be divided into ma- 



Navy of the American Revolution 163 

jor and minor operations. In major primary- 
operations fleets of considerable size and force 
are matched against each other, as was the 
case at the battles of Santiago, Trafalgar, 
and Martinique, Minor primary operations 
are engagements between some two or 
three of the smaller vessels of the combat- 
ants. A good example of these is the fight 
between the "Bon Homme Richard" and 
the "Serapis." Secondary operations are 
of several forms, chief of which is "com- 
merce-destroying." Continental vessels 
during a single cruise sometimes engaged in 
both primary and secondary operations. 

In the light of the comparison which has 
been made showing the relative strength 
of the Continental and British navies, the 
reader does not need to be told that the 
Marine Committee did not engage its fleet 
in major primary operations. The very" ex- 
istence of the Continental vessels depended 
upon their success in keeping outside the 
range of the larger guns of the Royal Navy. 
The Marine Committee sometimes gave 
specific orders to its captains to avoid the 
British " two-deckers. '^ In the minor pri- 
mary operations of the Revolution some 
thirty or thirty-five engagements may be 
counted. The honors here are upon the 
whole evenly divided. The Americans cap- 
tured ten or twelve naval vessels of the 
enemy. With the exceptions of the frigate 
"Fox," 26, captured by Captain John Manly 



164 Navy of tJic American Revolution 

between New England and Newfoundland; 
and the sloop "Brake/' 20, and the ships 
"Countess of Scarborough/' 20, and "Sera- 
pis," 44, captured by Captain John Paul 
Jones in European waters, the prizes of the 
Americans were minor naval craft, averag- 
ing ten or twelve 4's and 6's. The British 
captured or destroyed about the same num- 
ber of vessels as they lost, but their prizes 
on the average were larger and better armed 
vessels than were those of the Americans. 
Seven of them were frigates. On the other 
hand the British had no victory as brilliant 
as that of Jones off Flamborough Head. 

The secondary operations of the Conti- 
nental navy were more important than its 
primary operations. They mainly involved 
the protection of American commerce, the 
defence of certain Atlantic ports, the strik- 
ing of the lines of communication of the 
British military forces, the attacking of the 
enemy's commerce at sea, and the threaten- 
ing and assailing of her unprotected coasts 
and ports both at home and in her outlying 
dependencies. Each of these forms of 
secondary operations will now be briefly 
considered. 

The Committee defended American com- 
merce by ordering its cruisers to "attack, 
take, burn, or destroy" the enemy's priva- 
teers. One illustration of such orders will 
suffice. In November, 1778, the Committee 
wrote to the Navy Board at Boston that 



A^avy of the American Revolution 165 

"at present we consider it an Object of im- 
portance to destroy the infamous Goodrich 
who has much infested our Coast, cruising 
with a squadron of 4, 5, or 6 armed Vessels, 
from 16 guns downwards, from Egg Har- 
bour to Cape Fear in North Carohna."^ In 
its orders the Committee as a rule included 
the small naval ships of the enemy with the 
privateers. Of the three naval captains 
who lost their lives in the Continental serv- 
ice, two of them were killed in engagements 
with privateers. On March 4, 1778, the 
brigantine "Resistance," Captain Samuel 
Chew, while cruising in the West India seas 
had a desperate and indecisive encounter 
with a letter of marque of 20 guns. Chew 
and his lieutenant, George Champlin, both 
of New London, were killed; Chew was a 
native of Virginia.^ Late in the summer of 
1778 the "General Gates," 18, Captain John 
Skimmer, captured the brigantine "Mon- 
tague " in an engagement in which Captain 
Skimmer lost his life.^ 

In addition to defending the American 
commerce by cruising against the privateers 
and small naval ships of the enemy, the 



1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com- 
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, November 
16, 1778. 

2. F. M. Caulkins, History of New London, 
539-40; Records and Papers of New London 
Historical Society, Part IV, I, 9. 

3. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep- 
tember 14. 1778. 



i66 A'av\ of the American Revolution 

Continental vessels often threw their pro- 
tecting arm directly around the trade of the 
states. Vessels were often detailed to con- 
voy to sea American merchantmen and 
packets. At times when the trade was 
bound for France, the Continental vessels 
accompanied it even as far as the Grand 
Banks of Newfoundland, but as a rule their 
services did not extend beyond a few leagues 
from the American coast. Sometimes the 
Continental vessels were ordered to cruise 
off the Delaware Ba}^, or similar channel, to 
guide and protect incoming shipping. 

The Marine Committee cooperated with 
the army in the defence and in the attack 
of certain ports. In the campaigns around 
Philadelphia in 1777 and 1778 the Continen- 
tal navy lost some ten vessels, including three 
of the thirteen original frigates; and at the 
siege of Charleston in 1780 it lost four ves- 
sels. The British occupation of New York 
caused the destruction of the two frigates 
built at Poughkeepsie. In 1779 a Conti- 
nental vessel aided a Spanish expedition in 
capturing Mobile. Several times the Com- 
mittee placed part of its fleet under the con- 
trol of Washington and the Admiral of the 
French naval forces, when they were plan- 
ning an attack upon some seaport held by 
the enemy. 

In 1779 Gerard, the French minister, de- 
vised a plan which contemplated a joint 
expedition of the French and American 



iVaz'3' of the American Revolution 167 

fleets against the British colonies to the 
northward. Gerard's purpose was "to give 
the King of France HaUfax and Newfound- 
land/' In May, 1779, he consulted with 
Washington in his camp about the pro- 
23osed expedition. By September Gerard's 
plan, or a similar one, had so far matured 
that the Marine Committee ordered the 
Navy Board at Boston to prepare the Con- 
tinental vessels for a three months' cruise 
and to hold them ready to sail at a moment's 
warning to join the French fleet, or to pro- 
ceed to such other place as Washington or 
Count D'Estaing might direct. The Board 
was to provide a sufficient number of pilots 
for Newfoundland, Halifax, Rhode Island, 
and the Penobscot river. This expedition 
was not abandoned until November, 1779.^ 
The Committee struck at the enemy's 
lines of communication between his army 
and navy in America, and the British Isles, 
Canada, the Bermudas, Florida, and the 
West Indies. After the transfer of the war 
to the Southern states in 1778 and 1779, 
transports running between New York and 
Savannah and Charleston were vulnerable 
craft. The capture of British transports 
laden with munitions of war, provisions, and 
troops had the advantage of obtaining for 



1. Bancroft, History of United States, V, 
319; Marine Committee Letter Book, Commit- 
tee to Navv Board at Boston, September 28, 
November 10, 1779. 



1 68 A^avy of the American Revolution 

the Americans the very sinews of war, of 
which the enemy were deprived. When 
troops were captured, they could be ex- 
changed for an equal number of American 
prisoners. The reader may recall that it 
was for the purpose of intercepting British 
transports that Congress fitted out the 
first Continental vessels in October, 1775. 

The most successful capture of the ene- 
my's transports was made in the spring of 
1779. In order to protect the trade of the 
Southern states, depredations upon which 
were most frequent and destructive, the 
Marine Committee in February of that year, 
ordered the Navy Board at Boston to send 
certain of the Continental vessels to sweep 
the coast from Cape May to the bar of 
South Carolina. This detail of the armed 
vessels was made partly to satisfy the mer- 
chants of Baltimore, who had complained 
to Congress that their interests were being 
neglected. On March 13 a fleet consisting 
of the ^'Warren,'' 32, Captain J. B. Hop- 
kins, as commodore, the ''Queen of France,'' 
28, Captain Joseph Olney, and the ''Rang- 
er," 18, Captain Thomas Simpson, sailed 
from Boston, for the coast of the Southern 
states. On April 7 they captured the pri- 
vateer schooner, "Hibernia." This vessel 
told them of the sailing of a fleet of trans- 
ports from New York, bound for Brigadier- 
General Campbell's army in Georgia, and 
laden with stores and supplies. The next 



Navy of the American Revolution 169 

day fifteen leagues off Cape Henry, Hop- 
kins fell in with the fleet; and meeting with 
a trifling resistance, he made prizes of seven 
out of its nine vessels. These prizes were 
all sent to New England. On April 22, the 
*' Queen of France" arrived in Boston with 
the ship '^ Maria," 16, carrying eighty-four 
men, the schooner "Hibernia," 8, also car- 
rying eighty-four men, and the brigs "John," 
200 tons, "Batchelor," 120 tons, and ''Prince 
Frederick," 160 tons. Another prize. His 
Majesty's ship ''Jason," 16, with one hun- 
dred men, also reached Boston. The 
"Ranger" put into Portsmouth with the 
schooner "Chance" and a brig. The 
Marine Committee wrote to Captain Hop- 
kins congratulating him and his fellow cap- 
tains on the fortunate outcome of their 
cruise.^ 

The most- important objective of the 
Marine Committee in its naval operations 
was the capture of England's commerce in 
transit at sea. The Committee planned to 
intercept her sugar ships of the West Indies, 
her Newfoundland fishing craft, her Hud- 
son bay fleet laden with skins and peltries, 
her Guineamen with cargoes of ivory and 

1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com- 
mittee to Captain Olney, to Captain Harding, 
and to Navy^ Board at Boston, February 10, 
1779; Committee to Merchants of Baltimore, 
February 23, 1779; Boston Gazette, April 26, 
1779; Publications of Rhode Island Historical 
Society, VIH, 259. 



170 Navy of tJie Aincricaii Revolution 

slaves, and her Mississippi trade with its 
himber and furs. The Committee's agents 
and the naval officers abroad hoped to en- 
snare the enemy's Baltic trade, the Irish 
linen ships, the Brazil whaling fleet, and 
homeward bound East Indiamen. The 
sending of frigates to the Coromandel Coast 
to intercept the enemy's China ships and 
the trade of India was seriously considered. 
On one occasion the Committee designed to 
attack English vessels bound for Canada 
with cargoes of ''Indian goods." But gen- 
erally the blows were aimed at the fleets of 
rich merchantmen returning to England, 
for their many vessels were like honey- 
laden bees flying homeward to their hives. 
The British fishing fleet on the Grand 
Banks of Newfoundland and the homeward 
bound West Indiamen were found most 
vulnerable. It is not practicable for a com- 
batant to prey upon commerce far from 
his base of operations. The frequent man- 
ning of prizes depletes his crews and compels 
him to make an early return home. The 
chance of prizes being retaken is increased 
with the distance they must travel to 
reach safe ports. The operations of the 
Continental vessels in European waters 
were made possible by their use of French 
ports as naval stations. In attacking Eng- 
land's commerce the Marine Committee 
found most promise of substantial reward 
by directing its vessels to cruise during the 



Xavy of the American Revolution 171 

summer or the early fall some leagues to the 
eastward of the Bermudas in the track of 
the homeward bound West Indiamen, laden 
with rum, sugar, cotton, coffee, and other 
Colonial products. These fleets sometimes 
consisted of as many as 200 merchantmen 
under the convoy of a few ships of war. 
Skilful seamanship found it comparatively 
easy to cut out a few sail. In three in- 
stances Continental vessels made captures 
which netted them more than one million 
dollars each. 

Two of these fortunate cruises were made 
w^hile the fleet was under the direction of 
the Marine Committee. On May 4, 1779, 
the Committee wrote to the Navy Board 
at Boston that it desired that the ''Con- 
federacy,'^ "Warren," ''Queen of France,'^ 
"Ranger," "Jason," "Hibernia," and two 
of the lately built packets as tenders, and 
the "Deane," which it should send from 
Philadelphia, should be joined together and 
sail in company to the southward and at- 
tack the sea force of the enemy on the coast 
of Georgia. After routing the enemy there, 
the fleet was to throw itself in the way of 
the West India ships, bound to England. 
A fortnight later the Committee wrote that 
it had reason to lay aside the expedition 
to Georgia, and that it was their intention 
to place the collected naval force in such 
manner as to accomplish the double pur- 
pose of intercepting the enemy's transports, 



172 Navy of the American Revolution 

coming to and going from New York, and 
of attacking her homeward bound West 
India ships. 

In accordance with the latter plan of the 
Committee, sometime during the summer a 
fleet was sent to sea from Boston, consist- 
ing of the 'Trovidence", 28, Captain Abra- 
ham Whipple, commodore of the fleet, the 
''Queen of France," 28, Captain John. P. 
Rathburn, and the ''Ranger,^' 18, Captain 
Thomas Simpson. In August the American 
vessels fell in with the Jamaica fleet, bound 
for London, and convoyed by a 32-gun 
frigate and three other armed vessels. The 
Americans succeeded in cutting out from 
the fleet ten large merchantmen, heavily 
laden with rum and sugar. Of the ten ves- 
sels, seven arrived at Boston and one at 
Cape Ann. The names of these eight ships, 
whose average burden was 285 tons, were 
as follows: '' Holderness," ''Dawes," 
"George," "Friendship," "Blenheim," "The- 
tis," "Fort William," and " Neptune." This 
was one of the richest captures which the 
Continental fleet made during the Revolu- 
tion. The ships with their cargoes sold for 
more than one million dollars.^ Early in 

1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com- 
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, May 4, May 
20, 1779; Continental Journal and Weekly 
Advertiser, August 26, 1779; Boston Gazette, 
September 20, 1779. "Last Saturday noon 
this town was alarmed by the Appearance of 
Seven Topsail Vessels in the Offing, which, 



Navy of the American Revolution 173 

the year the ship ''General Gates" and the 
sloop 'Trovidence" sent prizes into Boston 
which sold for £240,000.^ 

The Marine Committee threatened and at- 
tacked the enemy's coasts and towns in the 
British Isles, Canada, and the West Indies. 
Two Continental vessels visited the mouth 
of the Senegal river on the west coast of Af- 
rica. An attack on the shipping of the 
Bermudas was ordered to be made, if it was 
found practicable. Nassau, New Provi- 
dence, was twice captured by Continental 
vessels, and a third time by a Spanish fleet 
and a ship of war of the South Carolina 
navy. Robert Morris, when vice-president 
of the Marine Committee, planned to send 
a fleet of five vessels against the British 
possessions in the West Indies and the Flor- 
idas. The movements of Captains Wickes, 
Conyngham, and Jones -in attacking and 
alarming the British Isles are well known.^ 
however, soon subsided, for between the Hours 
of Three and Five in the Afternoon were safe 
anchored in this Harbour the Continental 
Ships of War, 'Providence,' 'Queen of France.' 
and 'Ranger,' with Four Prize Ships laden 
with Rum and Sugar, being part of a Jamaica 
Fleet bound to London captured by the above 
Vessels." — Continental Journal and Weekly- 
Advertiser, August 26, 1779, published at 
Boston. 

1. Publications of Rhode Island Historical 
Society, VIII, 259. 

2. See Chapter IX and X, Naval Duties 
of American Representatives in Foreign Coun- 
tries. 



174 A'az'3' of the American Revolution 

These expeditions against British coasts, 
towns, and dependencies had several ob- 
jects in view. One, of course, was the cap- 
ture of booty. To the extent that the ex- 
peditions were directed against the ship- 
ping and commerce of the attacked ports, 
their object was similar to that of fleets 
which cruised against shipping and com- 
merce at sea. Another object is discovered 
in the thought of Morris when he planned to 
attack England in the West Indies. Such 
a move Morris believed would force the en- 
emy to withdraw part of his fleet from the 
coasts of the United States for the defence 
of his attacked colonies; and to the extent 
that he did so, the states would be relieved. 
The cruises made in the waters around the 
British Isles had in view the lessening of 
the prestige of Great Britain, the shaking 
of her credit, the alarming of her inhabi- 
tants, and the raising of her marine insur- 
ance; and also the impressing of Europe 
with the power and courage of the new 
American nation, and perchance, creating a 
diversion in its favor. Both a psychological 
and a political element entered into the pur- 
pose of the cruises in British waters. They 
realized to both Britain and the Continent 
the existence of a new flag and a new state 
in the family of nations. 

The naval plan devised by Morris, as 
vice-president of the Marine Committee, 
deserves additional notice. It was to be 



A^avy of the American Revolution 175 

put into operation by John Paul Jones, with 
a fleet composed of the '^Alfred/' "Colum- 
bus," ''Cabot," ''Hampden," and sloop 
"Providence." Jones was first to proceed 
to St. Christopher in the West Indies, which 
island was almost defenceless, capture the 
cannon, stores, and merchandise there de- 
posited, and then sail for Pensacola, Florida. 
Morris thought Jones might find it best to 
pass along the south side of Hispaniola, and 
alarm Jamaica by putting in to some of its 
ports. Arriving at Pensacola, he would 
find it defended by two or three sloops 
of war, which could be easily silenced, and 
the town would fall into his hands 
with its munitions of war, including one 
hundred pieces of artillery. Having re- 
duced Pensacola, Jones was to send a brig- 
antine and sloop to cruise at the mouth of 
the Mississippi, in order to waylay the Brit- 
ish merchantmen leaving there in March 
and April with cargoes of indigo, rice, to- 
bacco, skins, and furs, to the value of £\00,- 
000 sterling. Returning from the Gulf, 
he might alarm St. Augustine, and finally 
he might refit in Georgia, or South or North 
Carolina. He was directed to carry as 
many marines as possible for his opera- 
tions on shore. 

Morris's object in this expedition in- 
volved a nice bit of naval policy. He pur- 
posed not so much the taking of booty, as 
the alarming of the whole British nation, 



176 A'avy of the American Revolution 

and the forcing of the enemy to withdraw 
some of her naval forces from the coast of the 
United States. ''It has long been clear to me/' 
he said, ''that our infant fleet cannot protect 
our coasts; and the only effectual relief it 
can afford us, is to attack the enemy's de- 
fenceless places, and thereby oblige them 
to station more of their own ships in their 
own countries, or to keep them employed 
in following ours, and either way we are re- 
lieved so far as they do it." Morris pro- 
posed his plan as a substitute for one of 
Jones, which contemplated a descent on 
the west coast of Africa; and to the carrying 
out of which the Marine Committee had 
given its consent. Morris thought that the 
same results as Jones sought could be ob- 
tained with less risk by "cruizing Wind- 
ward of Barbadoes as all their Guinea Men 
fall in there."^ 

The Marine Committee naturally planned 
and carried out naval enterprises which 
had in view two or more forms of secondary 
operations. Sometimes it ordered its ves- 
sels to take stations at sea where they 
would be in position to intercept both the 
West India trade, and the enemy's trans- 
ports plying between New York and Eng- 
land. Often it left the specific object of a 
cruise to the Navy Board at Boston, or to 

1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Morris 
to Jones, February, 1, 1777; Morris to Com- 
modore Hopkins, February 5, 1777. 



Navy of the Am eric an Revolution 177 

the commander of a ship, and issued merely 
hhe general order to proceed to sea and 
cruise against the enemy. Any plan of the 
Committee which was directed towards 
meeting an immediate emergency was rarely 
carried out. The movements of the vessels 
were rendered uncertain by reason of de- 
pleted crews, deficient equipments, and the 
position of the British fleets. The Com- 
mittee was often in the dark as to the exact 
state of a vessel in New England with ref- 
erence to its preparation for sea. Conse- 
quently it made many plans and gave many 
orders which could not be put into opera- 
tion. The telegraph, cable, and rapid postal 
services have revolutionized the direction of 
naval movements. 

In prize-getting the Marine Committee's 
most successful years were 1776 and 1779. 
Beginning with 1776 the number of prizes 
taken by the Continental vessels for each 
year of the Committee's incumbency was, 
respectively, sixty, twenty, twenty, and 
fifty. The fifty prizes captured in 1779 
were probably more valuable than the one 
hundred taken in the other three years. 
As regards the number of Continental ves- 
sels lost, the years 1776 and 1779, when the 
fleet was decreased by but three ships, 
again prove to be the most fortunate years. 
In 1777 and 1778 twenty-six vessels, ten of 
which were frigates, were lost.^ With the 

1. Files of newspapers for the period of the 
Revolution. 



1 78 Navy of the American Revolution 

memory of the misfortunes of the past two 
years in mind, well might the Marine Com- 
mittee write, towards the end of 1778, of 
*'the bad success that hath hitherto attend- 
ed our Navy." In May, 1778, it wrote to 
the Navy Board at Boston, that the ''Com- 
mittee are entirely of Opinion with you that 
it will be proper to send out a Collected force 
to Cruise against our enemies that we re- 
cover the injured reputation of our Navy 
and the losses we have sustained."^ 

In 1779 the navy retrieved the bad effects 
of some of its disasters. Its changed for- 
tunes can in part be easil}^ accounted for. 
The transference of the scene of war to the 
Southern states late in 1778, removed a 
part of the British land and sea forces from 
the North, and thereby gave the Naval De- 
partment a freer hand in its operations^ 
and rendered the movements of the fleet 
less perilous. The Department this year 
had larger success in manning and equip- 
ping its fleet. It was, therefore, able not 
only to send the armed vessels to sea more 
frequently, but also to send several of them 
cruising in company. Such little fleets had 
a decided advantage over single cruisers, 
both in defensive and offensive operations. 
No doubt, too, the experiences and past fail- 
ures of the navy were now telling in a better 



1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com- 
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, May 8, No- 
vember 9, 1778. 



Navy of the America]! Revolution 179 

•understanding of naval tactics, and were 
bringing about a proper subordination and 
concert of action between officers and men. 
Possibly, something should be attributed 
to the Department's increased experience 
in marine affairs. 

The reader has probably already drawn 
parallels, far from fanciful, between the so- 
lutions of the naval problems of the Revolu- 
tion made by the Marine Committee and 
those of the Spanish- American war made by 
the Naval Board of Strategy at Washington. 
The naval problems presented to the two 
bodies were in certain respects widely differ- 
ent. Equally striking similarities appear. 
In both wars the United States was fighting 
a European power with possessions in the 
West Indies and in the Asiatic seas. The 
attacks on Nassau and Morris's proposed 
expedition against the British West Indies 
correspond to the movements of the Ameri- 
can fleet in the West Indies during the late 
war. The operations of Wickes, Conyn- y" 
gham, and Jones off the coasts of the British ' \ 
Isles are matched by the proposed descent 
on the Spanish coast in 1898. The plan 
made in 1777 to send a fleet of frigates to 
Mauritius and from thence to operate against 
the English trade in the Indian seas looks 
singularly like Admiral Dewey's movement 
from Hong Kong against Manila. 

The hope is to be cherished that America 
will never again cross swords with her kin 



i8o A^az'y of the American Revolution 

beyond seas, but if moved by some untoward 
fate she should, it is not too much to say 
that a Naval Board of Strategy at Washing- 
ton will devise plans of naval attack and de- 
fence quite similar to those of the Marine 
Committee. The weak spots in a nation's 
armor often prove to be its outlying depend- 
encies, especially when they are situated 
near the enemy's coast. The principles of 
naval strategy which led the Marine Com- 
mittee either to attack, or to plan to attack, 
Canada, the Newfoundland fisheries, the 
Bermudas, and the British West Indies, are 
still operative, notwithstanding the vast 
changes which the past century and a quar- 
ter have witnessed in the methods of naval 
warfare, and in the distribution of the terri- 
tory of the Western Hemisphere among na- 
tions, new as well as old. In a world of 
change the fundamental principles of naval 
strategy remain immutable. 



CHAPTER VII 



THE BOARD OF ADMIRALTY 

It is speaking tritely, although accurately, 
to say that our present executive depart- 
ments at Washington did not spring into 
perfect being in 1789 like panoplied Minerva 
from the head of Jove. Not a little of the 
interest and value of a study of the admin- 
istration of the Revolution comes from the 
fact that the administrative practices and 
experiences of this period gave rootage to 
the later and more perfect executive organs. 
The development of the Continental Naval 
Department, both in the variety and in the 
character of its forms, is typical of that of 
the other administrative departments of 
the Revolution. We have already seen how 
the naval business of the Continental Con- 
gress was first vested in the small Naval 
Committee; and how this Committee, early 
in 1776, was overshadowed and absorbed 
by the more numerous and more active Ma- 
rine Committee. We now come to the third 
step in this evolution, the superseding of the 
Marine Committee by the Board of Admiralty . 

The Marine Committee had proved slow, 



1 82 Navy of the American Revolution 

cumbrous, inexpert, and irresponsible. The 
wiser members of Congress had long seen 
that it was a prime defect in governmental 
practice to add to the duties of a legislative 
committee, those of an executive office; for 
it threw upon the same men too much work 
of too diverse kinds, and it removed from 
the administrative organ its most essential 
attributes of permanency, technical skill, 
and responsibility. In December, 1776, 
Robert Morris had urged the employment 
of a corps of executives chosen outside the 
membership of Congress, as a requisite to a 
proper and orderly management of the busi- 
ness of the Revolutionary government.^ 

As early as February "^26, 1777, WiUiam 
Ellery, a member of the Marine Committee 
from Rhode Island, wrote to William Ver- 
non at Providence, who was soon to become 
a member of the Navy Board at Boston, 
that a proper Board of Admiralty was very 
much wanted. ''The members of Congress," 
he said, ''are unacquaintedwith this Depart- 
ment. As one of the Marine Committee I 

l7 Force's Archives, 5th, III, 1336, Robert 
Morris to American Commissioners at Paris, 
December 21, 1776. Morris wrote as follows: 
"So long as that respectable body persist in 
the attempt to execute, as well as to deliber- 
ate on their business, it never will be done as 
it ought, and this has been urged many and 
many a time by myself and others, but some 
of them do not like to part with power, or to 
pay others for doing what they cannot do 
themselves " 



Navy of the American Revolution 183 

sensibly feel my ignorance in this respect. 
Under a mortifying Sense of this I wrote to 
you for Information in this Matter. Books 
cannot be had here; and I should have been 
glad to have been pointed to proper Authors 
on this Subject when I should be in a Place 
where Books may be had."^ Early in 1779 
when Congress was groping in search of a 
more efficient naval executive, Ellery again 
expressed regret at the lack of technical 
skill in the management of the navy. He 
said that the marine affairs would never be 
"well conducted so long as the supreme di- 
rection of them is in the hands of Judges, 
Lawyers, Planters, &c."^ Even before Mor- 
ris and Ellery had declared for better exec- 
utives, John Paul Jones, while distressed by a 
loss in naval rank caused by the appointing 
and the placing above him of certain ''polit- 
ical skippers,^' wrote that efficient naval 
officers could never be obtained, until Con- 
gress ' 'in their wisdom see proper to appoint 
a Board of Admiralty competent to deter- 
mine impartially the respective merits and 
abilities of their officers, and to superintend, 
regulate, and point out all the motions and 
operations of the navy."^ 

1. Publications of Rhode Island Historical 
Society, VIII, 205, Papers of William Vernon 
and Navy Board. 

2. Ibid., 257, Ellery to Vernon, March 23, 
1779. 

3. Force's Archives, 5th, II, 1106, Jones to 
Morris, October 16. 1776. 



184 Navy of the American Revolution 

During 1778 and 1779 Congress hit upon 
a system of executive departments that did 
little violence to its lust for power, and at 
the same time secured a permanent body 
of administrators and advisors. This was 
the system of executive boards, composed 
jointly of commissioners selected outside 
the membership of Congress, and of mem- 
bers of Congress. Congress and the Marine 
Committee probably derived a part of their 
knowledge of executive boards from the 
practice of the English government and of 
the states. ''Board of Admiralty" was the 
name during the Revolution, as now, of the 
British Naval Office. Pennsylvania, Vir- 
ginia, and South Carolina had early in the 
Revolution established ''Navy Boards." 
In October, 1777, Congress had formed a 
Board of War composed of five commis- 
sioners. In October, 1778, Congress at- 
tempted to clip the wings of this Board and 
bring it under Congressional control by sub- 
stituting two members of Congress for two 
of its five commissioners.^ On July 30, 
1779, a Board of Treasury was constituted 
on exactly this plan, being composed of 
three commissioners and two members of 
Congress-.^ 

In the spring of 1779 the feeling was gen- 
eral that some change must be made in the' 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 29, 1778. 

2. Ibid., July 30, 1779. 



A^avy of the American Revolution 185 

management of the navy. Both 1777 and 
1778 had been lean, empty, and disastrous 
years for the Continental fleet. The blame 
for this failure was placed upon the Marine 
Committee and the naval commanders. It 
was in April, 1779, that Washington wrote 
to John Jay asking questions and making 
suggestions about the management of the 
navy, which may be briefly summarized as 
follows: What are the reasons for keeping 
the Continental vessels in port? Had not 
Congress better lend them to '' commanders 
of known bravery and capacity " for a limit- 
ed term? If additional encouragement is 
necessary in order to induce seamen to en- 
list, why not give them the whole of their 
captures? Great advantage might result 
from placing the whole fleet under ''a man 
of ability and authority commissioned to 
act as commodore or admiral." Under the 
present system the Continental ships are 
not only very expensive and totally useless, 
but sometimes they require a land force to 
protect them.^ 

This arraignment of the navy is some- 
what severe. The last clause in the above 
paragraph refers to an incident which took 
place at New London in the spring of 1776. 
The reader may recall that Commodore Hop- 
kins put into this port on his return from 



1. Johnston, Correspondence and Public 
Papers of John Jay, I, 207-08, Washington to 
Jay, April, 1779. 



i86 Navy of the American Revolution 

New Providence and just after his unfor- 
tunate engagement with the '^ Glasgow." 
He then received a temporary loan from 
Washington of one hundred and seventy 
troops, with whom, for the time being, he 
replenished his depleted crews. He kept 
the troops less than six weeks. 

In his reply to Washington's letter, Jay 
ascribed the naval inefficiency to a defec- 
tive Naval Department. He said: "While 
the maritime affairs of the continent con- 
tinue under the direction of a committee, 
they will be exposed to all of the conse- 
quences of want of system, attention, and 
knowledge. The marine committee con- 
sists of a delegate from each state; it fluc- 
tuates, new members constantly coming and 
old ones going out; three or four, indeed, 
have remained in it from the beginning; and 
few members understand even the state of 
our naval affairs, or have time or inclina- 
tion to attend to them. But why is not 
this system changed? It is in my opinion, 
inconvenient to the family compact.''^ The 
"family compact" is supposed to refer to 
the Lees. During the Revolution the Lees 
and the Adamses formed the nucleus of a 
faction, which was generally opposed to con- , 
structive legislation in the field of adminis- 
tration. 



1. Johnston, Correspondence and Public 
Papers of John Jay, I, 209, Jay to Washing- 
ton, April 26, 1779. 



Navy of the Ainerican Revolution 187 

When this letter of Jay's was written a 
new naval system was forming.^ On June 
9 Congress resolved to vest in '' commis- 
sioners all business relating to the marine 
of these United States."^ Apparently this 
resolution of Congress meant that the naval 
affairs were to be given over to a board 
chosen outside the membership of Congress; 
if so, Congress soon retracted it. On Octo- 
ber 1, 1779, Congress discharged the com- 
mittee that had had the new project in 
hand, and directed the Marine Committee 
''to prepare and report a plan of regulations 
for conducting the naval affairs of the United 
States/'^ The Marine Committee reported 
on October 28,, 1779; thereupon, Congress 
passed resolutions making provision for a 
Board of Admiralty, ''to be subject in all 
cases to Congress." These resolutions were 
in important respects based upon those of 
October 17 and November 24, 1777, estab- 
lishing a Board of War.^ This was natural, 
as the work of a war and a naval office are 
quite similar. In the composition of the 
two boards there was a vital difference. The 
Board of War, as has been said, consisted 
of five commissioners; the Board of Admir- 

1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Com- 
mittee to Navy Board at Boston, April 27, 
1779. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, June 
9, 1779. 

3. Ibid., October 1, 1779. 

4. Ibid., October 17, November 24. 1777. 



i88 Navy of the American Revolution 

alty consisted of three commissioners and 
two members of Congress^ being modeled 
after the Board of Treasury. Any three 
members of the Board of Admiralty were 
empowered to form a quorum. No two 
members were permitted to come from the 
same state. The Board must have its office 
in the same town in which Congress was 
sitting. It selected its clerks, but Congress 
chose its secretary. 

The powers and duties of the Board of 
Admiralty were practically the same as 
those of the Marine Committee. The Board 
was to order and direct the movements of 
all ships and vessels of war. It was to su- 
perintend and direct the navy boards and 
see that they kept fair entries and proper 
accounts of all the business transacted by 
them. It was to keep a complete and ac- 
curate register of the officers of the navy, 
giving their rank and the date of their com- 
missions; these were to be signed by the 
President of Congress and countersigned 
by the secretary of the Board. The Board 
was to have the care and direction of the 
marine prisoners. It was to obtain regular 
and exact returns of all warlike stores, 
clothing, provisions, and miscellaneous arti- 
cles belonging to the marine department. 
Lastly the Board of Admiralty was to "exe- 
cute all such matters as shall be directed, 
and give their opinion on all such subjects 
as shall be referred to them by Congress, 



i 



Navy of the American Revolution 189 

or as they may think necessary for the bet- 
ter regulation and improvement of the navy 
of the United States; and in general to super- 
intend and direct all the branches of the 
marine department."^ 

The officers of the navy were enjoined to 
obey the directions of the Board of Admir- 
alty. The proceedings, records, and papers 
of the Board were to be open at all times 
to the inspection of the members of Con- 
gress. The Board of Admiralty was or- 
dered to examine at once the unsettled ac- 
counts of the navy boards and naval agents, 
and report thereon to Congress. It was 
further directed to form proper plans for 
increasing the naval force of the United 
States and for the better regulating of the 
same. 

The salary of each commissioner was 
fixed at $14,000, and that of the secretary 
of the Board at $8,000 a 3'ear. On 
September 13, 1780, these salaries were de- 
creased to $1,850 and to $1,100 a year, 
respectively, to be now paid quarterly in spe- 
cie or its equivalent.^ When Congress in- 
creased the salary of its Commissioners of 
the Treasury from $1,850 to $2,000, the 
Commissioners of Admiralty, exhibiting 
that delicate sense of the fitness of more 
pay which characterizes the employees of 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 28, 1779. 

2. Ibid., September 13, 1780. 



190 A'az'x of the American Revolution 

governments, petitioned for a similar in- 
crease in their salaries;^ and Congress, in 
accord with its subsequent character under 
the Constitution, refused a favor to the 
navy which it granted to a more popular 
branch of its public service.^ The Con- 
gressional members received no pay for 
their services on the Board. 

When Congress came to select Commis- 
sioners of Admiralty, it found no easy task. 
Men who were eager for distinction and 
honor felt that they were cultivating a surer 
field in their home governments or in the 
army. The prestige of the Continental gov- 
ernment was now declining. The dilution 
of salaries caused by the depreciation of 
the currency lessened the attractiveness of 
the Continental offices. Employees of Con- 
gress found it hard to support their families 
on their pay. Then too, the navy business 
had become a thankless and disheartening 
task. The class of men who will accept a 
disagreeable office with little pay and no 
glor}^ is a small one at any time. 

The first three commissioners elected by 
Congress were William Whipple of New 
Hampshire, chairmxan of the Marine Com- 
mittee, Thomas Waring of South Carolina, 
and George Bryan of Pennsylvania. Each 

1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress, 
37, p. 207, Report of Board of Admiralty, 
April 12, 1781. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
7, 1781. 



Navy of the American Revolution 191 

declined. On December 7 Francis Lewis 
of New York was chosen commissioner, and 
on the next day he accepted the office. 
Congress on the 3rd had named the two 
Congressional members of the Board, Wil- 
liam Floyd of New York, and James Forbes 
of Maryland. The appointment of Lewis 
vacated the position of Floyd, as two mem- 
bers from the same state could not serve 
on the Board. William Ellery of Rhode 
Island was now elected as the second Con- 
gressional member. Congress had already 
chosen John Brown, the secretary of the 
Marine Committee, to be secretary of the 
Board of Admiralty. Lewis, Forbes, and 
Ellery were sufficient to organize the Board. 
Accordingly on December 8, 1779, Congress 
resolved "that all matters heretofore re- 
ferred to the marine committee be trans- 
mitted to the board of admiralty."^ On 
December 10 the Board of Admiralty wrote 
to the Navy Board at Boston, informing it 
of the dissolution of the Marine Committee, 
and directing it to address in the future all 
letters and applications relating to the navy 
to the "Commissioners of the Admiralty of 
the United States."^ 

Upon the organization of the Board of 
Admiralty, its difficulties in obtaining quo- 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, No- 
vember 26, December 3, 7, 8, 1779. 

2. Marine Committee Letter Book, Board 
of Admiralty to Navv Board at Boston, De- 
cember 10, 1779. 



192 Navy of the American Revolution 

rums began; and the troubles of Congress 
in its search for additional commissioners 
continued. On January 22, 1780, Congress 
gave Brigadier-General Thomas Mifflin of 
Pennsylvania an opportunity to decline a 
commissionership.^ On March 21 Lewis was 
complaining to Congress that Forbes was 
sick, and that consequently there had been 
no Board since the 4th instant. He hoped 
Congress would fill up the vacancy and pre- 
vent the navy business from being longer 
suspended.^ On the death of Forbes on 
March 25, Congress elected James Madison 
to fill his place. Madison had but recently 
arrived at Philadelphia as a delegate from 
Virginia. 

In June, 1780, Lewis was again in trouble 
and was writing to Congress. He conceived 
that the addition of members of Congress 
to the Board of Admiralty was principally 
intended to lay such information before 
Congress from time to time as the Board 
desired to give, to explain its reports, and 
in the absence, or during the sickness, of 
a commissioner to make a quorum. He 
said that, notwithstanding the attention 
which Madison and Ellery had been dis- 
posed to give, their necessary attendance 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Janu- 
ary 22, 1780. 

2. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 78, XIV, 309, Lewis to President of Con- 
gress, March 21, 1780. 



Navy of the Anierican Revolution 193 

on Congress did not admit of their being 
daily and constantly present at the sessions 
of the Board; that Ellery had been super- 
seded in Congress ; and that at present there 
was no Board for lack of a quorum.^ Con- 
gress once more came to the rescue of Lewis 
and his Board by appointing Ellery and 
Thomas Woodford as commissioners.^ El- 
lery at once accepted, but Woodford for 
some reason declined the appointment. 
Congress never obtained a third commis- 
sioner. In the fall of 1780 Daniel Hunting- 
ton of Connecticut and Whitmill Hill of 
North Carolina were the Congressional mem- 
bers of the Board. On their being sup- 
planted in November, 1780, by new dele- 
gates to Congress from their respective 
states, it took the urgent solicitation of 
Lewis to get Congress to fill the vacancies.^ 
When the Board was discontinued in July, 
1781, it had but one Congressional member, 
Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer of Maryland. 
To all intents and purposes Lewis and 
Ellery were the Board of Admiralty ; and in 
many respects they were well qualified for 
their positions. Both were able men, though 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 78, XIV, 337-43, 349, Lewis to Presi- 
dent of Congress, June 6, June 12, 1780. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, June 
23, 1780. 

3. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress, 
37, pp. 291, 294, Lewis to President of Con- 
gress, November 4, 6, 1780. 



194 ^^ai'y of the American Revolution 

not brilliant. Both had passed the meridian 
of life; Lewis was in his sixty-seventh year, 
and Ellery in his fifty-second. Both had 
taken prominent parts in the Revolutionary 
counsels in their respective states ; both had 
been members of the Continental Congress 
and of the Marine Committee. Both were 
among the immortal Signers of the Declar- 
ation of Independence. Lewis had amassed 
a fortune as an importing merchant in New 
York, and had served in the French and 
Indian war. Ellery had been a merchant, 
and later a lawyer in Newport, Rhode Isl- 
and. Both men were interested in naval 
affairs, and had rendered good service on 
the Marine Committee. Lewis's work on 
the Board of Admiralty exceeded that of 
Ellery. 

From the first the Board of Admiralty 
was more dependent on Congress than the 
Marine Committe had been. Congress, al- 
ways jealous of its prerogatives, naturally 
permitted a freer exercise of power to a 
committee of its own members, than to a 
mixed board, whose work was almost en- 
tirely that of commissioners selected out- 
side the membership of Congress. To the 
Board's dependence on Congress for its 
organization was added that for means to 
carry out its naval program. The fre- 
quency with which it went to Congress ask- 
ing for quorums and money indicates its 
helplessness and weakness. 



Navy of the American Revolution 195 

The work of the Board of Admiralty was, 
generally speaking, that of the Marine Com- 
mittee under a change of name. It man- 
aged the dwindling business of the navy 
from December, 1779, until July, 1781. It 
was served by the Navy Boards and naval 
agents of its predecessor, the Marine Com- 
mittee. Immediately after its organization, 
the Board of Admiralty, in compliance with 
the resolutions of Congress, urged the Navy 
Boards and naval agents to transmit to it 
accurate accounts of their transactions up 
to December 31, 1779. Owing to the loose 
methods of business which obtained during 
the Revolution, the agents of the Board 
found it in most cases impossible to make 
such statements. 

The failure of the agents properly to re- 
port their accounts, together with a diminu- 
tion in the naval business of Congress, now 
led to some decrease in naval machinery. 
In August, 1780, the Board recommended 
that the tw^o Philadelphia prize agents be 
discharged, since it had not been able to 
induce them by means of its repeated writ- 
ten and verbal requests to exhibit their ac- 
counts. Congress now discontinued their 
office and gave their work to the Board of 
Admiralty.^ In the winter of 1780-81 the 



1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress, 
37, p. 125, Board of Admiralty to President of 
Congress, August 14, 1780; Journals of Conti- 
nental Congress, August 18, 1780. 



196 Navy of the American Revolution 

resignations of Winder and Wharton, as 
commissioners of the Navy Board at Phila- 
delphia, were accepted by Congress, and the 
duties of this Board were vested in its re- 
maining member, James Read.^ On May 7, 
1781, Congress accepted the resignation of 
Deshon of the Navy Board at Boston.^ The 
work of the Navy Boards and naval agents 
had now greatly diminished. Already the 
settling of naval accounts was becoming one 
of their principal tasks. After 1779 there 
were few Continental prizes to libel. Upon 
the resignation of the naval agents at Phila- 
delphia, those at Boston, Portsmouth, and 
New London were the only ones of conse- 
quence. 

The Board of Admiralty was called to act 
upon divers letters, petitions, and memor- 
ials, differing little from the similar com- 
munications which Congress referred to the 
Marine Committee. It also fell to its lot to 
prepare and report not a little important 
legislation. The reports of the Board, 
which were in writing, were chiefly the work 
of Lewis and EUery, and were presented to 
Congress by the Congressional members of 
the Board. Congress usually referred these 
reports to a committee, before it discussed 
them or took final action upon them. Not 
a few of the reports of the Board were. 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 5, 1780; January 11, 1781. 

2. Ibid., May 7, 1781. 



Navy of the Ainerican Revolution K^y 

however, pigeon-holed by Congress, and no 
action was taken upon them. The naval leg- 
islation of Congress during the incumbency 
of the Board of Admiralty was in part ren- 
dered necessary by the decline of the navy. 
Certain other legislation was caused by the 
putting into effect of the Articles of Con- 
federation on March 1, 1781; and a few 
Congressional resolutions on naval affairs 
may be attributed to the special legislative 
activity and enterprise of the Board of Ad- 
miralty. 

In January, 1780, Congress on the recom- 
mendation of the Board of Admiralty passed 
a resolution which was no doubt in harmony 
with administrative economy and thrift, 
but which pressed hard upon many naval 
officers. The pay of all officers in the navy 
not in actual service was at once to cease. 
Their commissions were to be deposited with 
the most convenient Navy Board, until the 
officers should be again called into service; 
each officer was to retain his rank.^ This 
was merely a courteous way of disestablish- 
ing the larger part of the navy. Owing to 
the capture and destruction of many Conti- 
nental vessels, most of the naval officers 
were not in actual service. The number of 
commissioned officers in actual service in 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 37, pp. 175-77, Report of Board of Ad- 
miralty, January 24, 1780; Journals of Conti- 
nental Congress, January 22, January 25, 
1780. 



198 Navy of the Ainericaji Revolution 

both navy and marine corps at this time 
was about twenty. It is clear that the 
Continental Congress was unfriendly to the 
theory that an employee of a government 
has a vested right in his office. 

On July 1 1 , 1780, naval salaries, subsistence 
money, and bounties were ordered to be 
paid in specie; forty Continental dollars 
were considered equal to one of specie. On the 
same day, in order that the depleted crews 
might perchance be recruited, Congress voted 
a bounty of twenty dollars to able, and ten 
dollars to ordinary seamen who should en- 
list in the navy for twelve months.^ On 
August 7 it provided that officers who had 
served aboard vessels of twenty guns or up- 
wards, and who should afterwards be de- 
tailed to vessels of less armament, should 
suffer no diminution in pay.^ These pro- 
visions all indicate a declining government 
and navy. 

On February 8, 1780, the Board of Ad- 
miralty secured the re-enaction of the reso- 
lutions of May 6, 1778, concerning the hold- 
ing of courts of enquiry and courts-martial.^ 
The most important provision of these reso- 
lutions, it is recalled, lessened the require- 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
11, 1780; Records and Papers of Continental 
Congress, 37, pp. 261-63, Report of Board of 
Admiralty, July 10, 1780. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, Au- 
gust 7, 1780. 

3. Ibid., February 8, 1780. 



A'az'3' of the American Revolution 199 

merits for the membership of courts-martial 
as fixed by Adams's rules. On the partial 
disestablishment of the navy in January it 
became increasingly difficult to assemble 
courts-martial composed entirely of naval 
officers. The only naval captain cashiered 
by a court-martial held under the direction 
of the Board of Admiralty was the eccentric 
Peter Landais.^ 

On May 4, 1780, the Board of Admiralty 
reported and Congress adopted the following 
device for a seal: "The arms, thirteen bars 
mutually supporting each other, alternate 
red and white, in a blue field, and sur- 
mounted by an anchor proper. The crest 
a ship under sail. The motto, sustentans 
et sustentatus. Legend, U. S. A. Sigil. 
Naval. ^'^ The anchor and ship under sail 
are still a part of the seal of the Department 
of the 'Navy. Instead of the arms, motto, 
and former legend, there now appear an 
eagle with outstretched wings, and the 
words "Navy Department, United States 
of America. '^ 

On April 20, 1780, Congress adopted a 
new form of commission for naval officers, 
v/hich the Board of Admiralty had drafted.^ 
This varied little from the one which had 
been used since the beginning of the Revo- 



1 See Chapter X, pages 298-300. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, May 
4, 1780. 

3. Ibid., April 20, 1780. 



200 Navy of the American Revolution 

lution. With slight changes in phraseology 
made to adapt it to the government under 
the Constitution, it is still used in the De- 
partment of the Navy at Washington. It 
is this form properly filled out which consti- 
tutes our present Admiral's title to his rank 
and office. The Board also prepared a form 
of commission, of bond, and of instructions 
for commanders of private vessels of war.^ 
In the instructions the rights of neutrals 
were especially guarded. Following the 
lead of ''Her Imperial Majesty of all the 
Russias," Congress declared that the goods 
of belligerents on board neutral vessels, with 
the exception of contraband, were not sub- 
ject to capture. It confined the term con- 
traband to those articles expressly declared 
to be such in the treaty of amity and com- 
merce of February 6, 1778, between the 
United States and France.^ 

Congress on March 27, 1781, passed an 
ordinance relative to the capture and con- 
demnation of prizes. This law was enacted 
by virtue of the ninth article of the Articles 
of Confederation, which vested the war 
powers in Congress. It codified the resolu- 
tions of November 25, 1775, and March 23, 
1776. It was more severe than these reso- 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, May 2» 
November 27, 1780, April 7, 1781 ; Records and 
Papers of Continental Congress, 37, pp. 225-41. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 5, 1780; Wharton's Diplomatic Corres- 
pondence, III, 860, 867. 



Navy of the American Revolution 201 

lutions, and omitted certain indulgences 
and exemptions, which they contained. It 
prescribed the penalty of forfeiture of vessel 
without trial for those captors who destroyed 
or falsified their ship papers. One of its 
provisions related to salvage.^ This law and 
also the one of April 7, 1781, fixing the in- 
structions of commanders of private armed 
vessels, brought former legislation into con- 
formity with the Articles of Confederation. 
The Board of Admiralty and Congress 
were inclined to disagree as to the proper 
construction to be placed upon the ninth 
article of the Articles of Confederation, 
which gave Congress 'Hhe sole and exclu- 
sive right and power of determining on 
peace and war." In a report which it made 
to Congress under date of May 29, 1781, 
after referring to the commissions which 
Massachusetts had issued to the "Protec- 
tor" and "Mars," two ships of the navy 
of that state, it said that " the Board hum- 
bly conceives that Commissions issuing 
from different Fountains of Power, is a 
matter which may merit the attention of 
the United States in Congress assembled 
who are the supreme power in Peace and 
War." The Board was inclined to take the 
view that Massachusetts had no right to 
issue these commissions. The committee 
of Congress to whom the report was re- 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, March 
27, 1781. 



202 Navy of the American Revolution 

ferred interpreted more narrowly the war 
powers of Congress than did the Board of 
Admiralty. It conceived that each state 
had the right to issue commissions to ships 
of war under the regulations established 
by Congress, and that the only step neces- 
sary to be taken for the present was for the 
Board to transmit to each state a copy of 
the present regulations governing the issu- 
ing of commissions.^ This incident is note- 
worthy in its indicating the existence of 
''strict" and ''loose" constructionists with- 
in three months after the Articles of Con- 
federation were adopted. 

If another illustration is needed to show 
the dependence of the makers of the Ameri- 
can navy upon British models, some words 
of the Board of Admiralty are in point. 
For a long time it had under consideration 
a revision of the rules and regulations of 
the Continental navy. Concerning its in- 
tention to inspect the British rules and in- 
corporate into its new code such of them 
as w^ere adapted to the American navy, it 
observed that it did not "think it unlawful 
to be taught by an enemy whose naval skill 
and power, until the reign of the present 
illustrious King of France, were superior to 



1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress, 
37, pp. 241-44. The Board of Admiralty 
probably had in mind the sixth as well as 
the ninth article of the Articles of Confeder- 
ation. 



Navy of the American Revolution 203 

that of any kingdom or state on earth. "^ 
It is beheved that the work of the Board 
in this particular was not brought before 
Congress. 

On January 15, 1780, Congress created a 
permanent Court of Appeals for the trial of 
prize cases appealed from state admiralty 
courts. Since January 30, 1777, such cases 
had been heard and determined by a stand- 
ing committee composed of five members 
of Congress. Such a committee naturally 
lacked permanency, expertness, and tech- 
nical and legal knowledge. The Court es- 
tablished in January, 1780, was to consist 
of three judges, who were to try, in accord- 
ance with the law of nations, questions of 
fact as well as law. On January 22, 1780, 
Congress chose as the three judges of the 
Court, George Wythe of Virginia, William 
Paca of Maryland, and Titus Hosmer of 
Connecticut.^ 

When the Board of Admiralty took charge 
of the navy in December, 1779, there were 
ten Continental cruisers in American waters. 
The ''Deane," 32, was fitting for sea at 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 37, pp. 277, 281, Reports of Board of 
Admiralty, July 24, July 26, 1780. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, Jan- 
uary 30, 1777; January 15, January 22, 1780; 
Jameson, Essays in the Constitutional History 
of the United States, Chapter I, Predecessor 
of the Supreme Court; Carson, Supreme Court 
of the United States, Part I, 50-57. 



204 A^avy of the American Revolution 

Boston; the ''Trumbull/' 28, was still in 
the Connecticut river; the " Providence/' 
28, "Boston," 24, ''Queen of France," 28, 
and "Ranger," 18, were on their way to 
Charleston, South Carolina, in whose de- 
fence they were to assist; the "Confederacy," 
32, was at Martinique repairing and refit- 
ting; and three vessels were still on the 
stocks, the "America," 74, at Portsmouth, 
"Bourbon," 36, at Chatham on the Connec- 
ticut river, and "Saratoga," 18, at Phila- 
delphia. The "Alhance" was at the Texel 
in Holland where she had arrived after 
playing an ignominious part in the cele- 
brated fight of Jones off Flamborough Head. 
This is not a formidable fleet, and its future 
movements have little bearing upon the 
great naval conflict now being waged be- 
tween the mistress of the seas on the one 
side and France and Spain on the other. 
The Continental navy, however, still had 
some important errands to run, both Wash- 
ington and the French were to ask its assist- 
ance, and on a few occasions the enemy 
was to find its officers and sailors no mean 
combatants. 

In completing the vessels which were 
building and in refitting those which were 
in commission, the Board of Admiralty was 
from the first sorely embarrassed by a lack 
of money. The difficulties which the Marine 
Committee had encountered were now in- 
tensified by the prostration of the country's 



Navy of the American Revolution 205 

finances and credit. The Board resorted to 
all means within reason in its attempts to 
obtain the requisites for prosecuting its 
work. In January, 1780, it wrote to the 
Board of Treasury that unless money was 
at once forthcoming the Naval Department 
would be at a standstill; and that not less 
than one hundred thousand dollars would 
be sufficient for its needs .* It eagerly sought 
the proceeds to be derived from the sale of 
rum, wine, fruit, and sugar, taken from 
Continental prizes. In the summer of 1780 
in order that its vessels might be in condi- 
tion to. render assistance to the expected 
French fleet, the Board solicited aid from 
the governors of New Hampshire, Massa- 
chusetts, and Connecticut; pressed the 
Commissary-General of Issues of the Conti- 
nental Army to furnish it with '^ 62,820 
weight of Bread and 13,260 weight of Flour" 
with all despatch;^ and finally, applied to 
John Holker, the Consul-General of France 
at Philadelphia, for a loan of 60,000 pounds 
of bread, promising to take special pains to 
repay it.^ 

Thus hampered, the Board was unable to 
accomplish much with its little fleet. Dur- 

1. Marine Committee Letter Book, Board 
of Admiralty to Board of Treasury, January 
7, 1780. 

2. Ibid., Board of Admiralty, to Commi- 
sary-General of Issues, August 21, 1780. 

3. Ibid., Board of Admiralty to Holker, 
August 29, 1780. 



2o6 Navy of the American Revolution 

ing its incumbency some half-dozen cruises 
were made by the Continental vessels. 
Twenty prizes were captured; half of them 
only reached safe ports. Two of the prizes 
were His Majesty's brigs ''Atalanta, " 16, 
and "Trepasse}^'' 14, which were taken by 
the "Alliance," 36, Captain John Barry, 
in May, 1781, when returning from France. 
During the fight, which lasted four hours, 
the gallant Barry was wounded in the 
shoulder. This voyage of Barry, during 
which he captured seven prizes, w^as the 
most successful one made under the direc- 
tion of the Board of Admiralty. 

In June, 1780, one of the most hotly con- 
tested engagements fought at sea during the 
Revolution occurred to the northward of 
the Bermudas between the ''Trumbull," 28, 
Captain James Nicholson, the ranking of- 
ficer of the Continental navy, and the Liver- 
pool privateer ''Watt," 32, Captain Coult- 
hard. After a fight of two hours and a 
half both vessels withdrew seriously dis- 
abled, and with difficulty made their ways 
to their respective ports — the "Trumbull" 
to Boston and the "Watt" to New York. 
A British account of the engagement places 
the loss of the "Watt" at eighty-eight men, 
and that of the "Trumbull" at "consider- 
able more." The Americans gave their own 
loss as thirty-eight men, and the British as 
ninety-two. The "Trumbull" had two 
lieutenants killed. Gilbert Saltonstall, the 



Navy of the Aiiicricaii Revolution 207 

captain of marines onboard the "Trumbull," 
wrote a vivid account of the fight. He was 
in the thick of it, and received eleven wounds. 
He said that "upon the whole there has not 
been a more close, obstinate, and bloody 
engagement since the war. I hope it won't 
be treason if I don't except even Paul Jones'. 
All things considered we may dispute titles 
with him."^ This was the first cruise of the 
"Trumbull." The other twelve frigates of 
the original thirteen were at this time either 
destroyed or captured. 

In July, 1780, a futile plan for an attack 
on New York was made. The Continental 
navy and army were to cooperate with the 
French fleet under the Admiral the Chevalier 
de Ternay. Under the direction of the 
Board of Admiralty, the Continental vessels 
continued to make voyages to France and 
the West Indies. The losses suffered by 
the navy during 1780 and the first half of 
1781 were considerable. The "Boston," 
"Providence," "Queen of France," and 
"Ranger" were surrendered to the British 
on the fall of Charleston in May, 1780. The 
"Confederacy," 32, Captain Seth Harding, 
returning from Cape Francois with a load of 
military stores and colonial produce, was, 
on April 14, 1781, captured by the British 



1. Records and Papers of New London 
Country Historical Society, part IV, I, 47-56; 
Boston Gazette, July 24, 1780 ; Gomer Wil- 
liams, Liverpool Privateers, 272-75. 



2o8 N'avy of the American Revolution 

naval ships, '^ Roebuck/' 44, and '^Orpheus/' 
32. The "Confederacy" was taken into the 
British navy under the name of "Confeder- 
ate." In March, 1781, the "Saratoga," 18, 
Captain John Young, foundered at sea and 
all on board were lost.^ 

Early in 1781 Congress resolved to super- 
sede the Board of Admiralty with a Secre- 
tary of Marine, but failed to find a man who 
was willing to accept the new office. In 
June, 1781, the plan of appointing an Agent 
of Marine, and vesting in him the duties of 
the Board of Admiralty, pending the selec- 
tion of a Secretary of Marine, was brought 
forward in Congress. The commissioners 
of admiralty were able to forecast the re- 
sults of this agitation for a new naval sys- 
tem. ^ On July 9, 1781, Ellery informed 
Congress "that his family affairs pressed his 
return home, and therefore requested leave 
of absence."^ As there was at this time 
but one Congressional member serving on 
the Board, on the absence of Ellery no quo- 
rum could be obtained. Lewis now prayed 
Congress to permit him to resign, or to give 
him such further directions " as they in their 



1. List of Officers in Revolutionary Navy, 
miscellaneous manuscripts in the Library of 
Congress. 

2. See Chapter VIII, Secretary of Marine 
and Agent of Marine. 

3. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
9. 1781. 



M. Navy of the American Revolution 209 

wisdom shall deem meet."^ On July 17 
Congress accepted his resignation.^ On July 
18 Congress put the marine prisoners in 
charge of the Commissary of Prisoners of 
the army, and ordered the seal of the ad- 
miralty to be deposited with the Secretary 
of Congress until a Secretary of Marine 
should be appointed.^ The Revolutionary 
Naval Department was without a head. 

The Board of Admiralty was not a satis- 
factory executive. It was at all times de- 
pendent on its Congressional members for 
quorums. It proved to be slower, more 
cumbersome, and less responsible than the 
Marine Committee. The management of 
the navy still lacked unity and concentra- 
tion. On the other hand, had the Board 
not been superseded, its commissioners would 
no doubt in time have developed greater 
expertness and technical skill than did the 
members of the Marine Committee. It 
should also be said that under more favor- 
able auspices the Board of Admiralty would 
have shown a higher administrative efficien- 
cy than it did ; for its lines had indeed fallen 
in unpleasant places, and a bankrupt federal 
treasury and a decadent Congress denied it 
the means requisite to the successful prose- 
cution of its work. 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 78, XIV, 445-47. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
17, 1781. 

3. Ibid., July 18. 1781. 



CHAPTER VIII 

THE SECRETARY OF MARINE AND THE 
AGENT OF MARINE 

On the question of the proper organiza- 
tion of the executive departments, the lead- 
ers of the Revolution were divided into two 
factions. Moved by their love of liberty, 
their distrust of governments, and their jeal- 
ousy of delegated and concentrated powers, 
the members of one faction favored the vest- 
ing of the executive business in Congres- 
sional committees. The members of the 
other faction, who stood for governmental 
authority and control, for constructive legis- 
lation in the field of administration, and for 
the application of the principles of business 
to the affairs of state, declared for a system 
of permanent and single-headed executives 
chosen outside of the membership of Con- 
gress. The issue that was here joined in the 
special field of administration was of course 
a part of that perennial and perpetual con- 
flict between the freedom of the individual 
and social control. In this case, as every- 
where and always, the political doctrinaires, 
the iconoclasts and radicals, and the men 



A^az'y of the American Revolution 211 

of heart rather than of head, hned up on the 
side of hberty; while the practical and con- 
servative men, the representatives of vested 
interests, and the cold, logical thinkers, 
stood together on the side of governmental 
control. 

The faction which distrusted power and 
washed to keep it scattered, may be called 
the ' 'dispersive school;" and the faction 
which wished to gather up the power and 
lodge it with a few men, may be called the 
^'concentrative school." To the ''disper- 
sive school" belonged Samuel Adams, the 
Lees, Patrick Henry, and William Whipple; 
to the ''concentrative school", Hamilton, 
Washington, the Morrises, and Jay. Early 
in the Revolution the advantage lay with 
the ''dispersive school." Its executive plan 
of Congressional committees needed little 
work to put it into operation; it was more 
flexible than the scheme of permanent single- 
headed executives; and it was more in har- 
mony with the ultra anti-monarchical spirit 
of the times. The Revolutionary govern- 
ment, originating as a congress of delegates, 
organized itself, after the manner of con- 
gresses, by means of committees of its own 
members. When the Congress became a 
Government, and had entrusted to it a mul- 
tiplicity of executive duties, it naturally 
continued and adapted the old organization 
for the transaction of its new business. The 
executive system of Congressional commit- 



212 N'az'y of the American Revolution 

tees, in this way becoming fixed, could .not 
be easily changed. 

By 1780 the ''concentrative school" was 
winning its way. Indeed, the adoption in 
1779 of mixed boards composed of men both 
in and out of Congress was a compromise 
between the two schools, in which the ''con- 
centrative school" gave up its contention 
for simplicity in the executive organs, in 
order to secure, in part at least, another of 
its objectives, permanency in the tenure of 
the administrators. By 1780 both com- 
mittees and boards had been tried and 
found wanting. Then too, there was a 
greater need for a change in the executive 
system, than in the first years of the war. 
As Congress became imbecile, the quality of 
its committees and of their work deterio- 
rated ; and as the country wearied of the war, 
and its finances tightened, the necessity for 
greater economy and efficiency in admin- 
istration increased. In 1780 the feeling 
among the leaders was general that a crisis 
in the army, in the finances, and in the busi- 
ness of the government, which could be met 
only by some thorough and far-reaching 
reform, was approaching. The leaders of 
the ''concentrative school" proposed a com- 
plete change in the administrative system 
of Congress as a solution of the serious prob- 
lems that confronted the country. By the 
end of 1780 a movement for a reform of this 
sort was in progress. It was diligently fur- 



A'az'y of the American Revolution 213 

thered by one school and zealously opposed 
by tbe other. 

"If Congress/' Washington wrote in De- 
cember, 1780, ''suppose that Boards com- 
posed of their own body, and always fluctu- 
ating, are competent to the great business 
of war (which requires not only close appli- 
cation, but a constant and uniform train of 
thinking and acting) , they will most assured- 
ly deceive themselves. Many, many in- 
stances might be adduced in proof of this.'' 
Washington was convinced that extrava- 
gant and improper expenditures of the pub- 
lic money, inexpertness in the transacting 
of business, and needless delays resulted 
from vesting all or a part of the duties of 
1 an executive office in Congress.^ Hamilton 
! declared specifically for the substitution of 
single executives for plural ones, and he 
I named three men whom he considered espe- 
I cially qualified for departmental posts, 
General Schuyler for Minister of War, Gen- 
eral McDougall for Minister of Marine, and 
Robert Morris for Minister of Finance. He 
conceived that there were always more 
knowledge, energy, responsibility, decision, 
despatch, zeal, and attraction for first-rate 

1. Ford's Washington, IX, 75-76„Washing- 
ton to James Duane, December 26, 1780; 33-5, 
Washington to John Sullivan, November 20, 
1780; 125, Washington to R. R. Livingston, 
January 31, 1781; 131-34, Washington to John 
Sullivan, February 4, 1781; 246, Washington 
to John Sullivan, May 11, 1781. 



214 Naz'y of the American Revolution 



ability ' 'where single men, than where bod- 
ies are concerned.' ^^ Gouverneur Morris 
contributed to the agitation in behalf of 
better executives an enumeration of the 
qualifications requisite in the men who were 
to become heads of the leading departments. 
He held, as still do some of the writers oni 
naval administration, that a Minister ofi 
Marine should possess a practical and tech 
nical knowledge of naval affairs ; and he pre 
sented a unique list of his qualities in the 
following words: 

''A minister of the marine should be a 
man of plain good sense, and a good econo- 
mist, firm but not harsh; well acquainted 
with sea affairs, such as the construction, 
fitting, and victualling of ships, the conduct 
and manoeuvre on a cruise, and in action, 
the nautical face of the earth, and maritime 
phenomenon. He should know the temper, 
manners, and disposition of sailors; for all 
which purposes it is proper, that he should 
have been bred to that business, and have 
followed it, in peace and war, in a military, 
and commercial capacity. His principles 
and manners should be absolutely republi- 
can, and his circumstances not indigent."^ 

It has been said that the debate in Con- 
gress over the change in the executive sys- 

1. Hamilton's Hamilton, I, 127, note, Ham. 
ilton to Robert Morris, 1780; 154-55, 159 
Hamilton to James Duane, September 3,1780' 

2. Sparks's Gouverneur Morris, I, 229-30. 



A^az'y of the Auiericaji Revolution 215 

tern was long, and was marked by the work- 
ings of party spirit, the self-interest of some 
members, and the doubts and fears and di- 
vided opinions of others.^ Samuel Adams 
placed himself at the head of the advocates 
of the old system. On January 10, 1781, 
the friends of the new system gained their 
first decisive victory; for on this day Con- 
gress resolved to establish a Department of 
Foreign Affairs, and to appoint for its chief 
officer a Secretary for Foreign Affairs.^ Five 
days later Adams wrote to Richard Henry 
Lee a letter which is almost pathetic in its 
earnestness and seriousness. "My friend," 
he said, "we must not suffer anything to dis- 
courage us in this great conflict. Let us re- 
cur to first principles without delay. It is 
our duty to make every proper exertion in 
our respective States to revive the old patri- 
otic feelings among the people at large, and 
to get the public departments, especially the 
most important of them, filled with men of 
understanding and inflexible virtue. Our 
cause is surely too interesting to mankind 
to be put under the direction of men, vain, 
avaricious, or concealed under the hypocrit- 
ical guise of patriotism, without a spark of 
pubhc virtue." Adams recognized that the 
public service needed reforming. This he 

1. Sparks's Gouverneur Morris, I, 227-28; 
Reed's Reed, II, 296. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, Janu- 
ary 10, 1781. 



2i6 Navy of the American Revolution 

would accomplish, not by a change of the ad- 
ministrative system, but by the introduction 
of more competent and more virtuous men 
into Congress and into its committees. This 
latter was to be brought about by a revival 
of civic interest in the several states.^ 

On February 7, 1781, Congress ''resumed I 
the consideration of the plan for the ar- 
rangement of the civil executive depart- 
ments." It this day resolved that there 
should be a Superintendant of Finance, a 
Secretary of War, and a Secretary of Marine. 
It summed up the duties of the Secretary of 
Marine in the following brief paragraph: 

"It shall be the duty of the secretary of 
marine to examine into and to report to • 
Congress the present state of the navy, a 
register of the officers in and out of com- • 
mand, and the dates of their respective ; 
commissions ; and an account of all the na- -i 
val and other stores belonging to that de- • 
partment; to form estimates of all pay, . 
equipments, and supplies necessary for the ■ 
navy ; and from time to time to report such 
estimates to the superintendant of finance, , 
that he may take measures for providing ; 
for the expences, in such manner as may best 
suit the condition of the public treasury; ; 
to superintend and direct the execution of 
all resolutions of Congress respecting naval 



1. Wells, Samuel Adams, III, 127, Adams to 
Lee, January 15, 1781; 128, extract from a letter 
of Luzerne, French minister to the United States. 



Navy of the American Revolution 217 

preparations; to make out, seal, and count- 
ersign all marine commissions, keep registers 
thereof, and publish annually a list of all 
appointments; to report to Congress the 
officers and agents necessary to assist him 
in the business of his department; and in 
general to execute all the duties and powers 
specified in the act of Congress constituting 
the board of admiralty." 

Speaking generally, the Secretary of Ma- 
rine was to succeed to the duties and powers 
of the Board of Admiralty. It is, however, 
significant that the Secretary was not spe- 
cifically charged with the ordering and 
directing of the movements of the vessels of 
war, as was the Board. The specified duties 
of the new office are largely secretarial. 
Congress was disposed to be less liberal in 
granting powers to a Secretary chosen out- 
side its membership than to a Board partly 
composed of Congressmen. On February 
9th the Salary of the Secretary of Marine 
was fixed at $5000 per annum. ^ 

On February 27, 1781, Congress, with a 
promptness which was exceptional, elected 
Major-General Alexander McDougall of New 
York to be Secretary of Marine, for which po- 
sition he had been recommended by Alex- 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Feb- 
ruary 7, February 9, 1781. On October 1, 
1781, the salary of the Secretary of Marine 
was fixed at $4,000 per annum, payable in 
specie. 



2i8 Navy of the American Revolution 

ander Hamilton. McDougall's qualifica- 
tions for the office were above the average. 
In the French and Indian War he had been 
a commander of privateers. Later he be- 
came a merchant in New York City. He 
was a leader of the Revolution in that state, 
and had risen to the rank of a major-general 
in the Revolutionary army, McDougall de- 
clined to accept the position proferred him 
unless permitted to hold his rank in the 
army, and to retain the privilege of return- 
ing to the field when his services were re- 
quired. He based this partial refusal on 
patriotic grounds. Congress did not wish 
a Secretary of Marine on these conditions; 
and it therefore voted that it did not expect 
the acceptance of Major-General McDougall, 
and that it had a due sense of his zeal ''for 
the safety and honour of America, and ap- 
plaud his magnanimity in declining 'to re- 
tire from the toils and perils of the field in 
the present critical condition of the United 
States in general, and that of New York in 
particular.' "^ Congress made no other 
choice of a Secretary of Marine. 

During the summer of 1781 the control of 
naval affairs gravitated towards Robert 
Morris. Soon after assuming the office of 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Feb- 
ruary 27, March 30, 1781. Three states were 
willing to accept McDougall on the conditions 
he proposed. Samuel Adams and his friends 
voted against acceptance. 



Navy of the American Revolution 219 

Superintendant of Finance in May^ 1781, 
he was brought into close relation with the 
navy. He was invited to take upon him- 
self more or less of the naval business by 
the urgent need of sending the cruisers on 
important errands, the helplessness of the 
Board of Admiralty, the inertia of Congress, 
and the interregnum in the headship of the 
Naval Department, which lasted from the 
discontinuance of the Board of Admiralty 
early in July, 1781, until the appointment 
of an Agent of Marine on September 7. The 
figure that Morris presents at this time is that 
of the strong and confident man of affairs, 
sagacious, expeditious, and painstaking, 
who is surrounded by weaker men, hesitat- 
ing, vacillating, and procrastinating in their 
administrative attempts. 

In June, 1781, Morris wrote to the Pres- 
ident of Congress recommending the ap- 
pointment of a captain for the 74-gun ship 
''America," and explaining how money for 
completing her might be obtained. He 
says that he is aware that John Jay has lib- 
erty to sell this ship at the Court of Madrid ; 
that he thinks and hopes that Jay will not 
succeed, for the sale of the ''America" would 
be injurious to the United States; and that 
it would be "more consistent with Oeconomy 
and with the dignity of Congress to have her 
finished than to let her Perish." On the 
receipt of this letter, Congress authorized 
Morris to take measures for launching the 



220 Navy of the American Revolution 

''America" and fitting her for sea.^ Morris 
now hinted to the Board of Admiralty that 
the frigate ''Trumbull" could perform ani 
essential public service if put under his di-" 
rection, and pursuing his plan, he obtained 
a rePolution of Congress giving him control of 
this vessel.^ During the summer of 1781, 
while the reorganization of the Naval De- 
partment was in suspense, Morris, on his 
own initiative, directed the fitting out of the 
"Alliance" and "Deane," and ordered them 
to proceed to sea, "being convinced that 
while they lay in port, an useless Expence 
must necessarily be incurred."^ 

Meanwhile, a movement to place the Na- 
val Department under the control of Morris 
had been set on foot in Congress. On June 
26 Meriwether Smith of Virginia reported 
a series of resolutions providing for the re- 
organization of the Naval Department, a 
work which he considered necessary because 
the present naval system was "inefficient 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 47, 55, Morris to President of 
Congress, June 22, 1781; Ibid., 28, p. 145, Re- 
port of Committee respecting "America"; 
journals of Continental Congress, June 23, 
l781. 

2. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 77; Journals of Continental Con- 
gress, July 11, 1781. 

3. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 137, Morris to President of Con- 
gress, September 10. 1781. 



A^az'y of the American Revolution 221 

and expensive."^ The most important of 
these resolutions was one which dissolved 
the offices of the Board of Admiralty, the 
navy boards, and the naval agents; and an- 
other, which empowered the Superintend- 
ant of Finance to appoint some discreet 
agent to manage the navy under the order 
and inspection of the said superintendant, 
until a Secretary of Marine should be ap- 
pointed, or until the further pleasure of Con- 
gress. On the day of their introduction 
these resolutions were referred to a com- 
mittee, consisting of Meriwether Smith of 
Virginia, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, 
and Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, of Mary- 
land. On July 2, having made a slight 
change in the phraseology of the resolutions, 
this committee reported them to Congress;^ 
and on July 6 it again reported them, hav- 
ing now added a few additional resolutions. 
One of the latter was to the effect that the 
election of a Secretary of Marine should be 
postponed until the first Monday in Novem- 
ber. On the putting of this resolution, it 
passed in the negative. Tfie states divided 
sectionally; the four New England states 
and Delaware voted in the negative; Penn- 
sylvania and the five Southern states, ex- 
cept South Carolina which was divided, 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 28, p. 135, Resolutions of M. Smith. 

2. Ibid., p. 133, Report of Committee on 
Smith's resolutions. 



222 iVai'v of the American Revolution 

voted in the affirmative; delegates from 
New York and New Jersey were not pres- 
ent in Congress. The vote seems to indicate 
the defeat of those who were in favor of 
placing the navy under the control of Mor- 
ris. On the same day, July 6, the remain- 
ing resolutions were referred to a committee 
consisting of Thomas McKean of Delaware, 
Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut, and Theo- 
doric Bland of Virginia.^ 

On July 18 the new committee reported a 
series of resolutions, differing little from 
those which had been referred to it, with the 
exception of one important change; the 
Agent of Marine was now to be appointed, 
not by Morris, but by Congress. On this 
day Congress passed two of the committee's 
resolutions. One of these transferred the 
care of the marine prisoners from the Board 
of Admiralty to the Commissary of Pris- 
oners of the army; and the other ordered 
the seal of the admiralty to be deposited 
with the Secretary of Congress, and em- 
powered him to use it in countersigning na- 
val commissions. The remaining resolu- 
tions again went over. Congress was able 
to agree on the discontinuance of the Board 
of Admiralty, but not on the arrange- 
ments for its successor.^ 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 28, p. 149, Resolutions of Committee; 
Journals of Continental Congress, July 6, 1781. 

2. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 



A^az'y of the American Revolution 223 

Finally, the whole business of the re- 
organization of the Naval Department was 
referred to a third committee, composed of 
Theodoric Bland of Virginia, James M. Var- 
num of Rhode Island, and James Duane of 
New York. On the report of this commit- 
tee on August 29, Congress agreed '^that for 
the present an agent of marine be appoint- 
ed, with authority to direct, fit out, equip, 
and employ the ships and vessels of war be- 
longing to the United States, according to 
such instructions as he shall, from time to 
time, receive from Congress." The Agent 
of Marine was to direct the selling of all 
prizes. He w^as to settle and pay the naval 
accounts, and keep a record of his work. 
As soon as he entered into the execution of 
his office, the functions and appointments 
of the board of admiralty, the several navy 
boards, and all civil officers, appointed 
under them, should cease and be determined. 
The salary of the new head of the Naval De- 
partment was fixed at $1,500 a year, and 
that of his clerk at $500. Both the Agent 
of Marine and his clerk were required to 
take an oath 'Veil and faithfully to exe- 
cute the trust reposed in them, according 
to the best of their skill and judgment"; 
and to give good and sufficient bond.^ 



gress, 28, p. 147, Report of Committee on July 
18; Journals of Continental Congress, July 18, 
1781. 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 



224 ^Vaz'A' of the American Revolution 

These resolutions of August 29 were to 
be only temporary; and they did not dis- 
place those of February 7, 1781, which pro- 
vided for a Secretary of Marine. A second 
temporary expedient was resorted to on 
September 7, when Congress resolved: 
'That until an agent of marine shall be ap- 
pointed by Congress, all the duties, powers, 
and authority assigned to the said agent, 
be devolved upon and executed by the said 
superintendant of finance."^ 

The reason why Congress appointed an 
Agent of Marine instead of a Secretary of 
Marine is not at all points clear. Having 
failed to secure the acceptance of McDougall 
as Secretary of Marine, Congress may have 
decided that the small and disheartening 
business of the navy would not attract first- 
rate talent; or that for the transaction of this 
business a full-fledged executive department 
was not necessary. It is more probable 
that the appointment of an Agent of Marine, 
under the circumstances of a disagreeing 
Congress, the failure of the Board of Admi- 
ralty, and the improbability of securing an 
efficient Secretary, was merely a temporary 
and feasible expedient for conducting the 
affairs of the navy. There are obvious rea- 
sons why the proposal to give the Superin- 



I 



gress, 28, p. 157; Journals of Continental Con- 
gress, August 29, 1781. 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep- 
tember 7, 1781. 



Navy of the American Revolution 22^ 

tendant of Finance the power to appoint 
the Agent of Marine, or the selection of Mor- 
ris as Agent, should have aroused vigorous 
opposition. Men of Samuel Adams's way 
of thinking would oppose it, among other 
reasons, because it placed too much power 
in the hands of one man. The friends of 
the navy would dislike to see the Naval De- 
partment swallowed up by the Department 
of Finance. But on the other hand, many 
considerations recommended the step which 
was finally taken. It was the most econom- 
ical disposition of the naval business which 
could be made. Morris had superior quali- 
fications for the office, and he was at once 
available. Indeed, he was the only man in 
sight that promised to be equal to the task 
of straightening out the tangle of marine 
accounts, of financing a bankrupt navy, and 
of wielding effectively that arm of the mili- 
tary service. He was admirably qualified 
for the headship of the Naval Department 
by his experience as a man of business, fa- 
miliar with accounts and the selection of 
employees, as the owner of a fleet of mer- 
chantmen, and as one of two or three of the 
most influential members of the Marine 
Committee during the years 1776 and 1777, 
when the navy was founded. Whatever 
may have been the shortcomings of the navy 
while Morris was directing it, they did not 
spring from the lack of an efficient execu- 



226 A'az'y of tlic American Revolution 

tive. For the first time during the Revo- 
lution its management was marked by 
despatch, decision, and an expert and ade- 
quate understanding of its problems. 

On September 8, 1781, Morris wrote to 
the President of Congress accepting, in 
words of modesty and reluctance, his ap- 
pointment as Agent of Marine. 'There 
are many Reasons," he said, 'Svhy I would 
have wished that this Burthen had been 
laid on other Shoulders, or that at least I 
might have been permitted to appoint a 
temporary Agent untill the further Pleasure 
of Congress. As it is I shall undertake the 
Task however contrary to my Inclinations 
and inconsistent with the many Duties 
which press heavily upon me, because it 
will at least save Money to the Public.'' 
He then added, in a characteristic way, 
some observations on his new task. ''True 
Oeconomy in the public business," he de- 
clared, "consists in emplojdng a sufficient 
Number of Proper persons to perform the 
Public Business." He wished the accounts 
of the marine department to be speedily set- 
tled.i 

Morris filled the office of Agent of Marine 
from September 7, 1781, until NoA^ember 1, 
1784. It is believed that he received no sal- 
ary as Agent of Marine. In addition to Mor- 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 133, Morris to President of Con- 
gress, September 8, 1781. 



Navy of the American Revolution 22y 

ris the personnel of the Marine Office con- 
sisted of James Read, Secretary to the. 
Agent of Marine, at a salary of $1,000 a 
year; Joseph Pennell, paymaster, at a sal- 
ary of $1,000; and George Turner, Commis- 
sary of Naval Prisoners, at a salary of $1,- 
200 ; the latter officer was authorized on July 
24, 1782.^ Read, who had been one of the 
commissioners of the Navy Board of the 
Middle Department, was of great service to 
Morris in conducting the business of the 
Marine Office. The clerical work of the 
Office was performed by the clerks of the 
office of the Superintendant of Finance, an 
instance of Morris's economies. 

According to the resolutions of Septem- 
ber 7, 1781, the positions of the commis- 
sioners of the navy boards were abolished 
and the positions of the prize agents were va- 
cated. The Navy Board at Boston con- 
tinued however to fit out vessels until 
March, 1782. It was not until some time 
later that it delivered over the books and 
papers of the Board to John Brown, the for- 
mer secretary of the Board of Admiralty, 
whom Morris had appointed naval agent for 
settling the business of the navy in New 
England. In the four New England states, 
North and South Carolina, and Georgia, 
Morris either re-appointed the prize agents 
of the Board of Admiralty, or appointed new 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, II, 183. 



228 Navy of the American Revolution 

ones; in the other states, he served in this 
capacity himself.^ 

The Agent of Marine, like the Board of 
Admiralty, communicated with Congress 
by means of written reports, which that body 
referred to special committees of its own 
members. Accordingly, when naval busi- 
ness was discussed in Congress, it usually 
came up in the form of a ''report of a com- 
mittee on the report of the Agent of Marine." 
The subjects upon which the Agent of Ma- 
rine reported were similar to those dealt 
with by his predecessors in naval adminis- 
tration. Not a few of his reports were con- 
cerned with the settling of marine accounts, 
and the satisfying of claimants against the 
government, which business was now in- 
sistent. During his tenure of the office of 
Agent of Marine, Morris prepared the larger 
part of the naval legislation of Congress. 
The changes or additions to his work which 
were made by committees of Congress were 
unimportant. 

The law that provides for a change in a 
governmental system is often incomplete, 
and experience under the new order of busi- 
ness soon suggests the need of supplemen- 
tary legislation. This was the case with 
the laws which transferred the naval busi- 
ness from the Board of Admiralty to the 
Agent of Marine. Morris, in one of his first 

1. M. I. J. Griffin, Commodore John Barry, 
169. 



iVaz'v of the American Revolution 229 

reports, explained to Congress that he had 
no power to hold courts of enquiry; there- 
upon, Congress, on November 20, 1781, re- 
vived the law of February 8, 1780, on the 
holding of courts of enquiry and courts-mar- 
tial, which had lapsed with the passing of 
the Board of Admiralty. Morris's busi- 
ness-like care for the saving of time and ef- 
fort is well shown, when in this report he 
tactfully suggests that Congress adapt their 
act not only to the Agent of Marine, but 
also to the Secretary of Marine, so that 
when the latter is appointed, ''it may not 
be necessary for him to bring this matter 
again under Consideration."^ 

By the law of November 20 Morris was 
empowered to constitute a court of enquiry 
with three persons ; and to constitute a court- 
martial with three captains and three first 
lieutenants of marines, ''if there shall be so 
many of the marines then present". But 
in the event that so many officers for a court- 
martial could not be conveniently assem- 
bled, he might appoint any five persons to 
hold it. Morris, convinced of the impro- 
priety of constituting naval courts with 
civilians, did not wish to avail himself of 
this latter alternative. Accordingly, on 
June 8, 1782, he made a report on naval 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 233, Morris to President of Con- 
gress, November 17, 1781; Journals of Conti- 
nental Congress, November 20, 1781. 



230 Navy of the American Revolution 

courts, which became the basis of the reso- 
lutions of Congress of June 12 on this sub- 
ject. These provided that in the future a 
marine court of enquiry or court-martial 
for enquiring into and trying capital cases 
should consist of five navy and marine of- 
ficers, two of whom should be captains; and 
in all cases not capital, should consist of 
three navy and marine officers, one of whom 
should be a captain in the navy. No sen- 
tence in capital cases was to be executed 
until approved by the Agent of Marine. All 
naval courts for commissioned officers must 
be appointed by the Agent of Marine. A 
captain in the navy might appoint a court- 
martial for the trial of offences committed 
by any other than a commissioned officer, 
provided that the sentencing of a warrant 
ofjicer to be cashiered should have the con- 
firmation of the Agent of Marine.^ 

During the incumbency of Morris, no cap- 
tain in the navy was cashiered. The find- 
ings of a court-martial, which was held in 
Boston in the early summer of 1781, possess 
a peculiar interest, because of the light which 
they throw upon the penal code of the Conti- 
nental navy, and because this case is one 
of the first in which a seaman in the Ameri- 
can navy was sentenced to be hanged. 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 643, Report of Morris, June 3, 
1782; Journals of Continental Congress, June 
12. 1782. 



Navy of the American Revolution 231 

Three seamen, who were enlisted on board 
the ''Alliance/' were tried for a breach of 
the 29th article of the rules and regulations 
of the navy.^ Of Patrick Sheridan, the 
court adjudged that he should be whipped 
three hundied and fifty-four lashes upon 
the naked back, one hundred and seventy- 
seven thereof alongside the ship "Alliance," 
and the remainder alongside the ship 
"Deane." John Crawford was sentenced 
to wear a halter around his neck, and receive 
fifty lashes. Sheridan and Crawford were 
to lose certain wages and their share of 
prize money. The court found the third 
seaman, William McClehany, ''peculiarly 
Guilty of a breach of all the Clauses in the 
Article aforesaid," and it adjudged that he 
should "suffer the punishment of death, 
and that he be hanged by the neck on the 
starboard fore Yard Arm of the said ship 
'Alliance' vmtil he is dead." 

The Board of Admiralty laid the pro- 
ceedings of this court-martial before Congress 
in July, 1781, but owing to the confusion of 
the naval business at this time, and to the 
carelessness of Congress, no action was 
taken on them. When John Brown, the 
naval agent of the Agent of Marine, reached 

1. The 29th article of Adams's rules as 
adopted by Congress in 1775 fixed penalties 
for desertion and cowardice. It is not likely 
that the numbering was changed. I know of 
no earlier instance of the sentencing of a sea- 
man in the American navy to be hanged. 



232 Navy of the American Revolution 

Boston, towards the end of 1781, he found 
the three men in prison, waiting the execu- 
tion of their sentences, and ''perishing with 
cold for want of Cloathing/' The fate of 
the three men is best told in Brown's words : 
''Under these circumstances it was the opin- 
ion of the Board (and I agreed with them) 
that as the proceedings had lain so long be- 
fore Congress without anything being done, 
and it being uncertain when they would act 
upon them, to save expence it was best to 
dispose of the Men in the best manner we 
could. Accordingly the two who were sen- 
tenced to be whipped were put on board the 
Deane, the other was sold by the Sheriff 
to pay his bill of fees, keeping, &c., and with 
the surplus of the money he procured us 
three good seamen for the Deane. My mo- 
tive for concurring in this proceeding was to 
save expence and preserve the public Money 
in my hands for more Material purposes."^ 

In December, 1781, and January, 1782, 
Congress passed an ordinance, "in pursu- 
ance of the powers delegated by the Con- 
federation," which codified in great part the 
previous legislation on captures and con- 
demnation of prizes, recaptures and sal- 
vage, contraband, and the sharing of prizes 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 367, Finding of Court Martial, 
dated June 28, 1781; 365, Morris to President 
of Congress, March 25, 1782, containing ex- 
tract from Brown's letter. 



Navy of the American Revolution 233 

between the captors and the government 
and between the captors themselves. Sev- 
eral changes were made in previous resolu- 
tions, and a few new ones were added. On 
their receiving a reasonable salvage, the re- 
captors of negroes, mulattoes, Indians, 
and indented servants, were to return all 
such property to its owners. The new or- 
dinance specified in some detail the various 
forms of property which were subject to cap- 
ture. It contained a revised list of articles 
of contraband. It declared that the rules 
of decision in the several admiralty courts 
should be ''the resolutions and ordinances 
of the United States in Congress assembled, 
public treaties when declared to be so by an 
act of Congress, and the law of nations, ac- 
cording to the general usages of Europe;" 
public treaties were given precedence over 
the two other classes of rules. ^ This ordi- 
nance went into operation on February 1, 
1782. Its importance is diminished by 
reason of its being in force during only the 
last year of the war, when the naval activi- 
ties of the American fleets had decreased. 

It is believed that this ordinance was en- 
tirely the work of Congress. Indeed, it soon 
appeared that there was at least one pro- 
vision, the giving of the whole of certain 
prizes to captors on board of Continental 
vessels, which the Agent of Marine disap- 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, De- 
cember 4, 1781, January 8, 1782. 



234 A'a'L'j; of the American Revolution 

proved. In June, 1782, Morris made a re- 
port to Congress in which he showed that, 
owing to the government's Uberality to its 
officers and seamen, it had lost ten thousand 
dollars on the late successful cruise of the 
frigate ''Deane,'' during which she had cap- 
tured five prizes of considerable value. He 
thought that wages, bounties, and one-half 
of prizes were quite sufficient inducements 
for manning the fleet. In all cases, however, 
in which the capture of a vessel of the enemy- 
was especially meritorious, Morris would have 
Congress encourage and stimulate effort 
and merit in the navy by giving the captors, 
by a special act of Congress, the whole of 
their prizes. On July 10, 1782, Congress 
passed an ordinance embodying Morris's 
recommendations.* 

When Morris, on September 7, 1781, be- 
came Agent of Marine, the direction of the 
movements of the Continental vessels was 
•vested in him, but with a serious limitation; 
he was authorized to employ the armed 
cruisers ''according to such instructions as 
he shall, from time to time, receive from 
Congress." Morris could never abide in- 
definite grants of power which confused 
authority; and he therefore, by means of a 
cleverly wTitten letter, ehcited a resolution 
from Congress giving him full power "to fit 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 559, Morris to President of Con- 
gress, June 20, 1782; Journals of Continental 
Congress, July 10, 1782. 



Navy of the American Revolution 235 

out and employ the ships of war belonging 
to these United States, in such manner as 
shall appear to him best calculated to pro- 
mote the interest of these United States."^ 

When Morris fell heir to the duties of the 
Naval Department, in the summer of 1781, 
the Continental navy was reduced to small 
numbers. There were in active service only 
five captains and seven Ueutenants in the 
navy, and three captains and three lieuten- 
ants in the marine corps. Including with 
these, those officers who were unemployed, 
were in private service, were prisoners, or 
were on parole, there were twenty-two cap- 
tains and thirty-nine lieutenants in the 
navy, and twelve captains and twelve lieu- 
tenants in the marine corps. ^ Only three 
vessels were now in commission; the frigate 
'Trumbull," 28, at Philadelphia, and the 
''Alliance," 36, and ''Deane," 32, at Boston. 
The "America" and ''Bourbon" were still 
on the stocks. About the first of Septem- 
ber, 1782, Morris purchased the ship "Wash- 
ington/' 20, and in October he took over 
into the Continental service in payment for 
a debt the ship "Due de Lauzun," 20. 

The movements of the fleet under Morris's 
direction were marked, as formerly, by bits 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 137, Morris to President of Con- 
gress, September 10, 1781; Journals of Con- 
gress, September 12, 1781. 

2. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 37, p. 473. 



236 Navy of the American Revolution 

of good and bad fortune, encounters with 
naval ships, privateers, and merchantmen, 
and voyages to France and the West Indies. 
From the summer of 1781 until the end of 
the war the little fleet captured twenty 
prizes, some fifteen of which reached safe 
ports. The last of his Majesty's vessels to 
surrender to a Continental ship was the 
schooner ''Jackall," 20, Commander Logie, 
which was taken in the spring of 1782 by 
Captain Samuel Nicholson, when in com- 
mand of the '^Deane,'' or the "Hague," as 
she was now called. By a singular coinci- 
dence the first, and the last, valuable prize 
captured by a Continental ship during the 
Revolution, were taken by Captain John 
Manly. On one of the last days of Novem- 
ber, 1775, he received the suri'ender of the 
brig ''Nancy," a transport; and in January, 
1783, while in command of the ''Hague" he 
captured the ship "Bailie" of 340 tons bur- 
.den, with a cargo consisting of sixteen hun- 
dred barrels of provisions.^ 

One of the most interesting, varied, and 
fortunate cruises of the war was made by 
Captain John Barry in the "Alliance," 36, 
one of the largest and best-built vessels of 
the Continental navy. Barry left New 
London on August 4, 1782, and having 
visited the region of the Bermudas, and the 
Grand Banks of Newfoundland, he sailed 
eastward and overhauled a fleet of Jamai- 

1. Boston Gazette, January 27, 1783. 



A'az'y of the American Revolution 237 

camen, and arrived at L'Orient on October 
17. He had captured nine prizes, four of 
which he carried into L' Orient. These four 
ships were Jamaicamen, and with their rich 
cargoes of rum and sugar, they sold for;^620,- 
610, one of the largest sums realized on 
any cruise during the Revolution. On De- 
cember 8, Captain Barry left France for the 
West Indies. Having made a call at Ma- 
deira, Barry early in January, 1783, an- 
chored at St. Pierre, Martinique, where he 
found a letter from the Agent of Marine or- 
dering him to proceed to Havana and con- 
voy the ''Due de Lauzun" to Philadelphia. 
About the first of February the ''Alliance" 
arrived at Havana, after she had put into 
St. Eustatius and Cape Francois, and had 
been chased by one fleet off Porto Rico and 
another off Hispaniola. On account of the 
closing of the port of Havana, Barry was 
detained here a month. After consider- 
able correspondence with the Governor of 
Havana, Barry on March 6 was permitted 
to sail with his convoy, which had on board 
seventy-two thousand dollars in specie. On 
March 10, 1783, Barry fell in with a British 
vessel, which is said to have been the frigate 
"Sibylle," 32, and he now fought the last 
naval engagement of the Revolution. It 
lasted forty- five minutes, ended indecis- 
ively, and resulted in the loss of ten men on 
board the "AUiance;" the loss of the British 
is unknown. The two American vessels 



238 Navy of the American Revolution 

now parted company, and each soon reached 
a safe port; the '^AUiance" arrived at New- 
port, Rhode Island, on March 20, and the 
''Due de Lauzun" anchored at Philadelphia 
on March 21. It was now two months since 
the Preliminary Articles of Peace had been 
signed at Versailles.^ The naval move- 
ments of the Continental vessels during the 
Revolution ended with the arrivals of these 
two vessels. 

While Morris had the direction of the 
fleet, only one vessel was captured by the 
enemy, and this before he became Agent of 
Marine. In July, 1781, he ordered the 
"Trumbull," 28, Captain James Nicholson, 
to proceed to Havana with despatches, let- 
ters, and a cargo of flour. The 'Tru.mbuh" 
had scarcely cleared the Capes of the Dela^ 
ware, on August 8, when she was chased by 
the frigate "Iris," 32, Captain George Daw- 
son. Encountering a storm, the "Trum- 
bull" was dismasted, and thus crippled she 
was overtaken by the "Iris." The "Trum- 
bull's" crew were a sorry lot; some of them 
were British deserters, and others were cow- 
ardly and disaffected. It was late in the 
evening when the fight began. Many of 
the crew now put out their battle lanterns 
and flew from their quarters. Captain 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, II, 103; M. I. J. Griffin, Commodore 
John Barry, 162-248, prints many contempora- 
neous papers relating to Barry's cruise. 



Navy of the American Revolution 239 

Nicholson and his officers, with a handful of 
seamen, bravely defended their ship against 
impossible odds for an hour before they sur- 
rendered. Nicholson lost sixteen men; two 
of his lieutenants were wounded. It is re- 
called that the ^^Iris" was originally the 
''Hancock," of the Continental navy, and 
that she was the first of the thirteen origi- 
nal frigates to surrender to the enemy. 
The "Iris" was a fast ship, and is said to 
have made the fortunes of all the British 
captains that commanded her. It was the 
irony of fate that the first of the thirteen 
frigates to be captured should receive the 
surrender of the last remaining one. A let- 
ter from New York, dated August 11, 1781, 
informs us that "this day arrived the cel- 
ebrated rebel frigate named the Trumbull."^ 
The attempts of Morris, in 1782, to ob- 
tain an increase in the naval force of Con- 
gress, form one of the most interesting and 
characteristic parts of his naval work. The 
surrender of Cornwallis on October 19, 1781, 
was not considered by many contemporane- 
ous Americans as an event that must neces- 
sarily end the Revolution. Indeed, the 
final outcome of the war was in doubt for 
more than a year. The Agent of Marine 
was too cautious and conservative to count 
on peace before its actual accomplishment 
had been sealed by a formal treaty. After 

1. Clowes, Royal Navy, IV, 72, 73; Penn- 
sylvania Packet, August 16, 1781. 



240 Navy of the American Revolution 

the surrender of Cornwall is he not only con- 
tinued to send the Continental cruisers 
against the enemy, but whenever an occa- 
sion presented, he vigorously urged on Con- 
gress the necessity of a naval increase. To 
the mind of Morris the need of a navy in 1782 
was greater than it had been at any previous 
time during the Revolution. He conceived 
that up to this time Britain had attempted 
to conquer the Colonies on land by means of 
her army; since she had been defeated in 
this, it was now her purpose to starve the 
Colonies into submission by means of her 
navy and superior sea-power. The United 
States must meet the enemy's change of tac- 
tics by building a navy. 

In April, 1782, Morris took steps to have 
the frigate ''Bourbon" completed. Con- 
gress was not convinced of the expediency 
of this, and was inclined to sell the frigate 
in its unfinished state. Morris wrote re- 
provingly to Congress that the most econom- 
ical thing to do was to complete the vessel; 
and that ''there is also a degree of Dignity 
in carrying through such measures as Con- 
gress have once adopted, unless some change 
of circumstances renders the execution im- 
proper." He then added: "The present 
circumstances of the United States I appre- 
hend to be such as should induce our atten- 
tion to the re-establishment of a Naval 
Force, and altho' former attempts have 
proved unfortunate, we must not take it for 



Navy of the American Revolution 241 

granted that future Essays will be unsuc- 
cessful. Altho' the Naval Force of our ene- 
my is powerful, and their Ships Numerous, 
yet that Force is opposed by equal Numbers, 
so as to give them much more employment 
than at the time our infant Fleet was 
Crushed/'^ 

On May 10, 1782, in response to a request 
of Congress, Morris submitted an exhaustive 
report on the state of American commerce. 
Referring to the intentions of the British, 
he declared that having been compelled to 
abandon the idea of conquest, their avowed 
design was to annihilate the American com- 
merce. The plans of the enemy could be 
frustrated and the American trade protected 
by so small a fleet as two ships of the line 
and ten frigates. The ships of the line, to- 
gether with two frigates, should be stationed 
in the Chesapeake, to cruise as occasion 
might require. The frigates should be di- 
vided into two equal squadrons, each of 
which should serve as a convoy of the Amer- 
ican trade between the United States and 
France. By each squadron making two 
round trips a year, a quarterly cornmunica- 
tion both ways between these two countries 
would be established. The United States 
of course could not provide this service, but 
the ships which the plan required might 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, I, 415, Morris to President of Con- 
gress, April 24, 1782. 



242 Navy of the American Revolution 

be detailed from the French or Spanish fleet. 
"It is to be hoped/' Morris said, ''that if the 
war continues much longer, the United 
States will be able to provide the necessary 
force for themselves, which at present they 
are not, tho' if the above arrangements take 
place, they might now provide for the trade 
from America to the West Indies." Con- 
gress authorized Morris to apply to both 
Spain and France for the needed vessels.^ 

But a more extensive naval plan than this 
was in Morris's mind, and one which could be 
undertaken independent of foreign ships. 
On July 30, 1782, he submitted to Congress 
an estimate for the public services of the 
United States for the year 1783, amounting 
in all to eleven millions of dollars. More 
than one-fifth of this sum was to be spent 
on the navy. "Congress will observe," he 
said, "that the estimates for the Marine De- 
partment am.ount to two Millions and a 
half, whereas there was no Estimate made 
for that Service in the last year any more 
than for the civil list." Morris based this 
most remarkable recommendation for a na- 
val increase on the belief that the enemy 
had changed his mode of warfare, and that it 
was now his purpose to annihilate the com- 
merce of America, and thus starve her into 
submission. With this sort of a campaign, 
conducted by the enemy, an American army 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, 1, 447, Report of Morris, May 10, 1782. 



Navy of the American Revolution 243 

without a navy would be burdensome with- 
out being able to accomplish anything. 
With a navy, we could prevent the enemy 
from making predatory excursions, ruining 
our commerce, and capturing our supplies; 
he would either be compelled to keep a su- 
perior naval force in this country, which 
w^ould give our allies a naval superiority 
elsewhere; or else he must permit the bal- 
ance of naval strength in America to be on 
our side; in which latter case we could pro- 
tect our trade, annoy his commerce and cut 
off the supplies which he would be sending to 
his posts in America. Then, concluded 
Morris in words which remind one of the an- 
nual report of some recent Secretary of the 
Navy asking for the yearly quota of battle- 
ships: ''By oeconomizing our Funds and 
constructing six ships annually we should 
advance so rapidly to Maritime importance 
that our enemy would be convinced not 
only of the Impossibility of subduing us, 
but also of the Certainty that his forces in 
this Country must eventually be lost with- 
out being able to produce him any possible 
Advantage;'^ and we should in this way 
regain the ''full Possession of our Country 
without the Expence of Blood, or treasure, 
which must attend any other Mode of Oper- 
ations, and while we are pursuing those 
Steps which lead to the Possession of our 
natural Strength and Defence."^ 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 



244 A'az'v of the American Revolution 

The signing on November 30^ 1782, of the 
Provisional Articles "of Peace between the 
United States and Great Britain, news of 
which reached America early in the spring 
of 1783, removed the necessity of a naval 
increase, and in the minds of many the need 
of a navy at all, Morris did not at once 
give up the notion that the government on 
a peace footing should maintain a respect- 
able marine. In May, 1783, he asked Con- 
gress to relieve him of his naval duties. 
''The affairs of the Marine Department," he 
writes, "occupy more time and attention 
than I can easily spare. This Department 
will now become important, and I hope 
extensive. I must therefore request that 
Congress will be pleased to appoint an 
Agent of Marine as soon as their conven- 
ience will admit."^ He became convinced 
however that not much could be done for 
the navy until the finances of Congress were 
placed on a better and more permanent 
basis. In July, 1783, Morris made a report 
on a proposition of Virginia offering to sell 
her naval ship ''Cormorant" to the United 
States. Congress agreed to his report, 
which was as follows: "That although it 
is an object highly desirable, to establish a 
respectable marine, yet the situation of the 
gress, 137, I, 713, Estimate for public services 
for 1783, July 30, 1782. 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, II, 425, Morris to President of Con- 
gress, May 3, 1783. 



Navy of the American Revolution 245 

public treasury renders it not advisable to 
purchase ships for the present, nor until the 
several states shall grant such funds for the 
construction of ships, docks, naval arsenals, 
and for the support of the naval service, as 
shall enable the United States to establish 
their marine upon a permanent and re- 
spectable footing."^ 

Meanwhile, Congress had been rapidly go- 
ing out of the naval business, by formally 
ending the war at sea, by providing for the 
settlement of marine accounts, and by dis- 
posing of its naval stock. On March 24, 
1783, it ordered the Agent of Marine to re- 
call all armed vessels cruising under the 
American colors. On April 11 it issued a 
'^ Proclamation, Declaring the Cessation of 
arms, as well by Sea as by Land, agreed 
upon between the United States of America 
and His Britannic Majesty; and enjoining 
the observance thereof." On April 15 it 
ordered the Agent of Marine to set free all 
the naval prisoners of the enemy .^ 

During the last year of the Revolution 
and for several years after its close, one of 
the principal administrative tasks of the 
government was the settling of the outstand- 
ing accounts of the several executive de- 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, II, 725, Report of Morris, July 31, 
1783; Journals of Continental Congress, Au- 
gust 5, 1783. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, March 
24, April 11, April 15, 1783. 



246 Naz'y of the American Revolution 

partments. This was a work fraught with 
extraordinary difficulties. The administra- 
tion of a government founded and conducted 
amid the distractions of war was necessarily 
marked by irregularities in official procedure, 
the lack of system in accounting, and in 
general by haphazard ways of business. On 
February 27, 1782, Congress acting on the 
recommendation of Morris authorized him 
to appoint five commissioners with full 
power and authority to liquidate and finally 
settle the Revolutionary accounts. Each 
commissioner was paid $1,500 a year; he 
was permitted to employ a clerk. The 
states were recommended to empower the 
commissioners to examine witnesses under 
oath. Each commissioner was given charge 
of a certain class of accounts; to one of the 
five men fell the settling of the accounts of 
the Naval Department. Owing to Morris's 
caution in making appointments, and to the 
obstacles that stood in the way of a wise 
choice, the "commissioner for settling the 
accounts of the marine department" was 
not selected until June 19, 1783, when Jo- 
seph Pennell, the paymaster of the Marine 
Office, was named for the place.^ By the 
fall of 1783 Pennell was settled in his work, 
and was complaining of its arduousness. 
He soon found himself involved in a dispute 
with the members of the old Naval Com- 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Feb- 
ruary 27. 1782, June 19, 1783. 



Xaz'y of the American Revolution 247 

mittee. He said that they had received 
money from Congress for which they had 
not accounted; and that, according to the 
vouchers, they had paid one debt twice. 
He found that the members of the Marine 
Committee were individually charged with 
the moneys they had received; and that 
when they left the Committee, they made 
no settlement. In many instances vouchers 
were lacking. Statements from members of 
the Navy Boards and from the naval agents 
could be obtained only with great difficulty, 
as these men were now discharged, and they 
were often scattered. He discovered that 
the prize agents made no uniform charge 
for their services; some exacted five, and 
others two and a half per cent on the re- 
ceipts from the sale of prizes. Offices for 
settling the naval accounts were opened in 
Philadelphia, New York, and Boston. On 
the retirement of Morris, Pennell became re- 
sponsible to the new Board of Treasury.^ 

In the last year of the war Congress began 
to dispose of its naval craft. On September 
3, 1782, the 74-gun ship ''America" now at 
last almost ready for launching was on the 
recommendation of the Agent of Marine 
given to France to replace the ship of the 
line ''Magnifique," 74, which the French 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, HI, 651, 655, Morris to President of 
Congress, May 26, 1784, enclosing extract of 
letter of Pennell. 



248 Naz'y of the American Revolution 

fleet had recently lost in Boston harbor. 
Congress, ''desirous of testifying on this oc- 
casion to his Majesty, the sense they enter- 
tain of his generous exertions in behalf of 
the United States/' directed the Agent of 
Marine to present the "America" to Lu- 
zerne, the French minister at Philadelphia, 
for the service of His Most Christian Majes- 
ty.^ It was a gracious act of international 
friendship. In April, 1783, the "Due de 
Lauzun" was lent to the French minister 
to carry home some French troops, after 
which service she was to be sold.^ In July 
Morris ordered the "Hague" to be sold, 
and recommended to Congress a like dispo- 
sition of the "Bourbon," which latter ship 
in all probability had been recently 
launched.^ In March, 1784, Morris recom- 
mended the sale of the "Alliance," as she 
was "now a mere bill of costs;" and also 
the "Washington," because much money 
would be required to repair her, and there 
was no need to employ her as a packet, 
since the French and English had estab- 
lished a mail service. ** Lieutenant Joshua 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep- 
tember 3, 1782. 

2. Ibid., April 21, 1783. 

3. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 137, III, 677, Report of Morris, July 22, 
1783. 

4. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress, 
137, 3, p. 243, Report of Morris, March 19, 
1784. 



Navy of the American Revolution 249 

Barney, acting as the agent for the Naval 
Department, sold the '' Washington" in 
Baltimore in the summer of 1784. 

The members of Congress were not unani- 
mous on the question of the proper disposi- 
tion of the "Alliance." On January 15, 
1 784, a committee of three reported : " That 
the honour of the Flag of the United States 
and the protection of its trade and coasts 
from the insults of pirates require that the 
Frigate of Alliance should be repaired."^ 
A committee in March, 1784, and another in 
May, 1785, recommended her sale.^ Final- 
ly, on June 3, 1785, Congress directed the 
Board of Treasury "to sell for specie or 
public securities, at public or private sale, 
the frigate Alliance, with her tackle and 
appurtenances.'^^ In August, 1785, the 
Board of Treasury sold this vessel for £2,887, 
to be paid in United States certificates of 
public debt. The purchasers afterwards 
sold the "Alliance" at a great profit to 
Robert Morris. In June, 1787, this vessel 
sailed for Canton, China, as a merchantman.^ 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 28, p. 221, Report of Committee, Janu- 
ary 15, 1784. 

2. Ibid., 28, pp. 213, 225-27, Reports of 
Committees. 

3. Journals of Continental Congress, June 
3, 1785. 

4. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 140, 11,45, Board of Treasury to Presi- 
dent of Congress, August 5, 1785; M. I. J. 
Griffin, Commodore John Barry, 258-59. 



250 Navy of the American Revolution 

From the sale of the '^AlUance" until the 
establishment of a new navy under the 
Constitution in 1794 it was left to the stars 
and stripes floating from American mer- 
chantmen to familiarize foreign ports and 
seas with the symbol of the new Nation. 

Congress did not formally end the naval 
establishment by act or resolution, unless 
one considers that such was the effect of 
the resolution of January 25, 1780, which 
provided that the pay of all naval officers 
except those in actual service should cease. 
After this date it would seem that as the 
vessels were captured, sold, or thrown out 
of commission, the names of the officers were 
taken from the pay-roll. In September, 
1783, an unsuccessful attempt was made in 
Congress to discontinue the Agent of Mar- 
ine.^ Morris continued in office until No- 
vember 1, 1784, when he retired from public 
service. Congress made no move to fill his 
place as Agent of Marine, for there was little 
need for such an official. Certain unimpor- 
tant naval business, chiefly concerned with 
the settlement of naval accounts, remained, 
however, to be transacted. This for the 
most part naturally fell to the Board of 
Treasury, organized in the spring of 1785. 
This Board, aided by the commissioner for 
settling the marine accounts, and by James 
Read, the efficient secretary to the Agent 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Sep- 
tember 16, 1783. 



iVaz'3' of the American Revolution 251 

of Marine, with whom Morris on retiring 
left the books and papers of the Naval De- 
partment, wound up the small, unimportant, 
and dwindling business of the navy. ♦ 



CHAPTER IX 

NAVAL DUTIES OF AMERICAN REPRE- 
SENTATIVES IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES 

On the outbreak of the war between the 
Colonies and the mother-country, Congress 
turned with true pohtical insight to France 
for aid. The self-interest of no other coun- 
try in Europe gave so good a basis for friend- 
ship and alliance with America. To France, 
the success of the revolting British Colonies 
meant the humbling of a victorious rival, 
the turning of a part of Britain's valuable 
colonial trade into French channels, and 
probably a reopening of the trial at arms of 
the Seven Years' War and a reversal of some 
of its humiliating decisions. Common inter- 
ests led the two countries to cooperate in 
achieving and furthering their objects and 
ambitions; and this led to the establishing 
of intimate diplomatic, commercial, and 
naval relations between them. Many of the 
duties that grew out of these three classes 
of relations had to be transacted in France, 
and they therefore necessitated the appoint- 
ment of American representatives to be 
resident in that country. The naval duties 



Navy of the American Revolution 253 

of these representatives were numerous and 
important. They involved the renting, pur- 
chase, and building of naval vessels; the 
officering, manning, and fitting out of ves- 
sels; the directing of cruises; the purchase 
of naval supplies; the disciplining of officers; 
the paying of officers and crews; the dispos- 
ing of prizes; the devising of naval plans; the 
commissioning of privateers; the caring for 
naval prisoners and the negotiating for 
their exchange; and the disseminating of 
naval intelligence. The vesting of these 
duties in the American representatives in 
France virtually constituted the establish- 
ment of a Branch Naval Office at Paris. ^ 

Besides the above duties, which may be 
considered strictly naval in character, the 
American representatives had other busi- 
ness closely related to their admiralty work, 
but which was also intimately connected 
with their diplomatic and commercial work. 
For instance, dealings with breaches of neu- 
trality committed by American ships had 
to do equally with diplomatic and naval 
affairs. The selling of colonial products 
which the Commercial Committee of the 
Continental Congress exported to France, 

1. For convenience the term "Naval Of- 
fice" will be used in this chapter. It will be 
understood of course that there existed no 
"Naval Office" apart from the Office of the 
American representatives at Paris, in whom 
were vested diplomatic, naval, and commer- 
cial duties. 



254 A'aT'v of the American Revolution 

and the buying of French manufactures 
which the American representatives shipped 
to America, were of course commercial du- 
ties. These transactions, however, came 
into contact with naval affairs when the 
goods purchased in France happened to be 
naval stores, or when naval ships carried 
the goods or convoyed the merchantmen 
which carried them. For the sake of ob- 
taining a complete view of the admiralty 
work of the American representatives in 
France, this chapter will touch upon naval 
duties of all sorts even though their diplo- 
matic and commercial aspects stand out the 
most prominently. 

The first naval business of the Colonies in 
France fell to Silas Deane, a political and 
commercial agent of the Continental Con- 
gress, who arrived at Paris in July, 1776. 
In December, 1776, Deane was succeeded 
by three American commissioners to the 
Court of France, Benjamin Franklin, Silas 
Deane, and Arthur Lee. These three men 
shared the naval duties of their office until 
the spring of 1778, when Deane was super- 
seded by John Adams. In February, 1779, 
Franklin, who had been chosen Minister 
Plenipotentiary at the Court of France, fell 
heir along wdth the other duties of the com- 
missioners to those of a naval character; 
and he continued in this office until the end 
of the Revolution. Of the first three com- 
missioners Silas Deane had the most to do 



Navy of the American Revolution 255 

with the naval business. He says that the 
management of the Continental ships of 
war and of their prizes which was a ''most 
complicated and embarrassing part of our 
affairs" fell entirely upon himself.^ When 
Deane was superseded, it would seem that 
his naval duties fell to Franklin rather than 
to Adams. Franklin had at all times the 
chief part of the work of exchanging naval 
prisoners with Great Britain; and Adams 
excelled the other commissioners in trans- 
mitting to the home government naval in- 
telligence. 

The headquarters of the Naval Office were 
of course situated at Paris, several hundred 
miles from the ports frequented by the Con- 
tinental vessels. This was a great disad- 
vantage, as it caused delays in communicat- 
ing with the naval officers and naval agents, 
besides other inconveniences. The Office 
gave its orders as a rule by letter, but now 
and then when its officers and agents visited 
Paris, it communicated with them by word 
of mouth. Its official correspondence with 
the home government was carried on al- 
most exclusively with the ''Foreign Office" 
at Philadelphia — that is, at first with the 
Committee of Secret Correspondence, then 
with the Committee of Foreign Affairs, and 
finally with the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. 
A few letters passed between the Naval 

1. Ingraham, Papers relative to Silas Deane, 
67. 



256 Navy of the America}! Revolution 

Office at Paris and the Naval Department 
in America. The secretary and the clerks, 
first of the Commissioners, and later of the 
Minister at the Court of France, assisted in 
transacting the naval business. 

The American representatives at Paris 
employed agents in a number of the chief 
Atlantic ports of France to transact their 
naval and commercial business. The prin- 
cipal agencies were at Nantes, L'Orient, 
Bordeaux, Brest, and Dunkirk. There were 
also agencies at Bilbao, and Corufia, Spain; 
and in Holland. It is difficult to separate 
the naval and commercial duties of these 
agencies, as they were vested in the same 
men. The whole subject is exceedingly 
complicated. For transacting naval busi- 
ness, Nantes was the most important agency, 
although L' Orient was not far behind it. At 
Nantes in 1777 within a comparatively short 
period of time one finds Thomas Morris, a 
half-brother of Robert Morris, William Lee, 
a brother of Richard Henry Lee, Jonathan 
Williams, a nephew of Franklin, John Ross, 
a Philadelphia merchant, and a certain Ger- 
man merchant by the name of Schweig- 
hauser exercising similar duties. William 
Lee was for a time commercial agent for all 
of France, and his authority of course came 
in contact with that of the Commissioners 
at Paris. ^ Such divisions and duplications 

1. Wharton's Diplomatic Correspondence 
and Ford's Letters of William Lee are the best 
sources for the work of these agents. 



A^avy of the American Revolution 257 

of powers resulted in much contention, mis- 
understanding, and jealousy. John Adams 
tells us that when he arrived in France in 
the spring of 1778 he found in some places 
two or three persons claiming the character 
of American agents; and that at one port, 
three agents had been appointed, one by 
the Commissioners at Paris, another by the 
commercial agent of France, and a third 
by the Commercial Committee of Congress. 
''We have such abuses and irregularities 
every day occurring as are very alarming. 
Agents of various sorts are drawing bills 
upon us, and the commanders of vessels of 
war are drawing upon us for expenses and 
supplies which we never ordered." Moved 
by the reformatory zeal that so often char- 
acterizes the new appointee to public office, 
Adams attempted to reduce the business 
of Congress in France to some system.^ 

The Naval Office at Paris appointed sev- 
eral naval officers by filling out blank com- 
missions and warrants, which had been 
signed and sent by the President of Congress 
for that purpose. Late in the war the 
question arose as to the proper rank in the 
navy of some of these appointments. In 
certain specific cases which were referred to 
Robert Morris as Agent of Marine, he rec- 
ommended that new commissions be oranted 



1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence 
II, 595, Adams to Commercial Committee, 
May 24, 1778. 



258 Xaz'y of the American Rez'ohition 

dated as the old, and that the officers re- 
ceiving them take rank according to the 
dates of their old commissions. The Naval 
Office granted commissions of captain to 
Gustavus Conyngham, Samuel Nicholson, 
Peter Landais, and John Green. On the 
recommendation of John Paul Jones it ap- 
pointed Richard Dale to be a lieutenant on 
board the *'Bon Homme Richard.'' Dale 
became an officer of distinction in the new 
navy under the Constitution, where he rose 
to the rank of commodore. Landais was 
the only Frenchman who received a perma- 
nent commission as captain in the Continen- 
tal navy. 

Silas Deane had a penchant for recom- 
mending French officers; and he was very 
credulous as to the compliments expressed 
by themselves and their friends in their be- 
half. On November 28, 1776, Deane wrote 
to the Committee of Secret Correspondence 
as follows, having just referred to certain 
army officers whom he was sending to 
America: "As to sea officers, they are not 
so easily obtained, yet some good ones may 
be had, and in particular two, one of whom 
I have already mentioned; the other is 
quite his equal, with some other advantages; 
he was ffi'st lieutenant of a man-of-war, 
round the World with Captain Cook, and 
has since had a ship, but wants to leave 
this for other service where he may make a 
settlement and establish a family. These 



Navy of the American Revolution 259 

two officers would engage a number of 
younger ones, should they embark. I send 
herewith the plans of one of them for 
burning ships." The French officer who 
designed these plans, also made ''drafts of 
ships and rates for constructing and regu- 
lating a navy," of which Deane had the 
'' highest opinion." This officer, Deane said, 
''has seen much service, is a person of study 
and letters, as well as fortune, and is ambi- 
tious of planning a navy for America, wdiich 
shall at once be much cheaper and more 
effectual than anything of the kind which 
can be produced on the European system."^ 
That Deane gave too ready an ear to the 
soft w^ords of the French, is clear from his 
extravagant recommendations of the er- 
ratic and troublesome French captain, Peter 
Landais. Deane said that Lanclais would 
be a "valuable acquisition to our Navy;" 
and that he was a "skilful seaman of long 
Experience in every Part of the World, of 
good judgment and the most unsuspicious 
honor and Probity." In May, 1778, Con- 
gress continued Landais in the naval service; 
but directed "the commissioners of the 
United States at foreign courts" not to 
"recommend any foreign sea-officers, nor 
give any of them the least expectation of 



1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence 
II, 191, 200, Deane to Committee of Secret 
Correspondence, November 6, November 28, 
1776. 



26o A^az'y of the American Revolution 

being employed as captains in the navy/'^ 
The Naval Office at Paris issued a few 
commissions to pri\ateers. As early as 
October, 1776, Deane was WTiting to the 
Committee of Secret Correspondence for 
blank commissions. Private as well as pub- 
lic interests were involved in the cruises of 
Captain Gustavus Conyngham in European 
waters. Carmichael, a Marylander and an 
employee in France of Congress and the 
Commissioners at Paris, asserted that Deane 
in 1777 intended to equip a vessel in the 
Mediterranean sea partly on public and 
partly on private account, that an agent 
was employed who succeeded in buying a 
vessel, but that the state of Genoa inter- 
posed and stopped the enterprise.^ Two fa- 
mous, or better infamous, letters of marque 
were fitted out at Dunkirk and commis- 
sioned by the Naval Office in 1779. They 
were named the ''Black Prince" and the 
"Black Princess." Their crews were a 
malodorous medley, containing *'a few 
Americans, mixed with Irish and English 
smugglers." These smugglers had recently 
broken prison in Dublin, recaptured their 
smuggling vessel, and escaped to Dunkirko 
Should they be recaptured by the English 



1. Collections of New York Historical So- 
ciety, Deane Papers, II, 122; Journals of Con- 
tinental Congress, May 9, 1778. 

2. Ingraham, Papers relative to Silas 
Deane, 141-49. 



I 



Navy of the American Revolution 261 

and their identity be discovered, they would 
be forced to suffer the penalty for smuggling. 
As they spoke English, it was thought that 
their past character might be best concealed 
by giving them an American commission, 
instead of a French one. These two priva- 
teers captured or destroyed upwards of one 
hundred and twenty sail of the British, and 
insulted "the coasts of these lords of the 
ocean." In the summer of 1780, the 
"Black Prince" was wrecked on the coast 
of France, and the commission of the "Black 
Princess/' upon the request of Vergennes, 
the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, was 
recalled by Franklin.^ In 1780 certain 
American prisoners, who had escaped, fitted 
out a privateer at Cadiz in Spain and asked 
Jay, the American minister at Madrid, for 
a commission. He referred them to Frank- 
hn.2 

When the American Commissioners as- 
sembled in Paris in December, 1776, to begin 
their mission, they had with them the orders 
of Congress to purchase, arm, and equip a 
frigate and two cutters. They were to send 
the frigate cruising against the enemy in 
the English channel, and were to employ 
the cutters in transporting supplies to 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
III, 802-03; IV, 26, 33; Hale's Franklin in 
France, I, chapter XVI, Privateers from Dun- 
kirk. 

2. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence 
III, 731. 



I 



262 Navy of the American Revolution 

America. The Commissioners were fur- 
ther directed to hire or buy at the French 
Court eight line of battle ships.^ They be- 
gan to carry out these orders in January, 
1777, when Captain Samuel Nicholson was 
sent to Boulogne to purchase one of the 
cutters; in the spring a lugger was obtained 
at Dover, England ; and in the early summer 
another cutter w^as bought at Dunkirk. In 
the two latter transactions Wilham Hodge, 
a merchant from Philadelphia, acted as the 
agent of the Commissioners. Early in the 
year Captain Lambert Wickes, who had in 
December, 1776, arrived in France in the 
Continental sloop '^ Reprisal" with Dr. 
Franklin on board, was inspecting vessels for 
the Commissioners. Nicholson's cutter was 
named the '^ Dolphin;" and Hodge's two 
vessels were calM, respectively, the "Sur- 
prise" and the ''Revenge." It is believed 
that the ''Revenge" was purchased jointly 
on public and private account. After this 
vessel's first cruise it is known that Hodge 
and possibly others were pecuniarily inter- 
ested in its ventures. 

By the fall of 1777 the Commissioners had 
completed the construction of a 32-gun fri- 
gate at Nantes, which they called the 
"Deane." They also purchased a ship 
which they fitted out as a 28-gun frigate 



1. Journals of Continental Congress, Octo- 
ber 3, 1776; Wharton, Diplomatic Correspon- 
dence, II, 177. 



Navy of the American Revolution 263 

and named the "Queen of France." Early in 
1778 they sent the "Deane" under the 
command of Captain Samuel Nicholson, and 
the '' Queen of France " under the command 
of Captain John Green, both vessels laden 
with supplies, to Boston. The " Deane " re- 
mained in the navy until the end of the 
Revolution. The ''Queen of France" was 
surrendered to the British in May, 1780, on 
the fall of Charleston, South Carolina. On 
the application of the Commissioners to the 
French Court for the loan or sale of some 
ships of the line, they were told that the 
French government considered it absolutely 
necessary to keep the whole of its fleet at 
home ready for the defence of France in 
case of a rupture with Great Britain; but, 
that, since England was apprehensive of 
a war with France, such a disposition of the 
French naval forces was serviceable to 
America in so far as it forced England to 
retain an equal force in the British seas.^ 

In the spring of 1777 the Commissioners 
received orders from Congress to build six 
vessels of war; but before this, they had on 
their own responsibility contracted with 
"one of the ablest sea officers of France, 
skilled in all the arts relating to the marine,'' 
who had offered "his services to our States, 
with the permission of the minister,'' to 
"superintend the building of two ships of 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence. 
II. 284. 



264 Xaz'y of the Auicricaii Revolution 

war, of a particular construction, which, 
though not of half the cost, shall be superior 
in force and utility to ships of sixty-four 
guns." This officer had already built a 
vessel of this type for the King of France 
which the Commissioners were told ''ex- 
ceeds everything in swift sailing."^ Only 
one of these frigates, which was named the 
''Indian," was placed upon the stocks, and 
this one at Amsterdam. To conceal its 
ownership and destination it was built in 
the name of a private individual. The 
Commissioners wrote in the fall of 1777, 
when the ship was almost finished, that it 
was a large frigate and was supposed to 
equal a ship of the line, as it would carry 
thirty 24-pounders on one deck. The ship 
did not get to sea under Continental colors. 
Owing to the many difficulties of equipping 
and manning so large a ship in a neutral 
port, and to the lack of money necessary 
for such work, the Commissioners sold it to 
the King of France for a sum equal to that 
which they had expended upon it; the Ejng 
at the same time agreed to pension well the 
officer who had built it.^ With the sale of 
this frigate the work of the Naval Office at 
Paris in naval construction came to a close. 
The "Indian " was finally rented to the state 



1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 284-85. 

2. Ibid., 433, Commissioners to Committee 
of Foreign Affairs, November 30, 1777. 



A'avy of the American RevGhition 265 

of South. Carolina. In 1779 and 1780 the 
French government loaned several vessels 
to the Naval Office. 

During the years 1777, 1778, and 1779, 
the fitting out of Continental armed vessels, 
as well those which were sent to France 
from America, as those which were originally 
obtained by the Commissioners, was a se- 
vere tax on the slender resources of the Con- 
tinental treasury at Paris. After a long 
voyage or cruise a wooden sailing vessel 
needed much repairing. Perchance, it must 
be careened and cleaned or repaired below 
the water line; new masts and spars were 
often needed; and old sails had to be mended 
and new ones provided. Always, the vessel 
before beginning a new cruise must be fresh- 
ly provisioned; and its crew, depleted by 
battle, desertion, and the dispensations of 
Providence, had to be replenished. The en- 
listing of a few recruits was not a difficult 
thing at this time, for there was human drift- 
wood in every port of Christendom, of divers 
nationalities, willing to ship under any flag. 
Many Frenchmen enlisted in French ports 
on board American vessels. In 1782 Frank- 
lin said he was continually pestered by such 
Frenchmen, who, being put on board prizes, 
had been captured by the English, and were 
now demanding arrears of pay.^ In May, 
1779, Franklin was complaining to Congress 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
V, 512,13. 



266 Navy of the American Revolution 

that the expense of fitting out each Conti- 
nental cruiser which it sent to France 
amounted to 60,000 or 70,000 Hvres. He 
said that Mr. Bingham, the Continental 
agent at Martinique, had recently drawn 
upon him for the expense of fitting out two 
Continental cruisers which had recently put 
in to that island, but for lack of money he 
would be obliged to protest Bingham's bill.^ 
The American representatives in France 
fitted out and loaded with supplies for Amer- 
ica both Continental vessels and French and 
American merchantmen. This work prop- 
erly forms a part of their commercial duties. 
Deane tells us that while he was in France 
he expended more than ten million livres 
for stores, goods, and ships; and that he 
loaded sixteen ships for America.^ The 
commercial agents had much to do with 
this work; Nantes was the principal shipping 
port. 

Before the treaties of February, 1778, be- 
tween the United States and France, the dis- 
posing of prizes captured by American ves- 
sels in French ports was exceedingly infor- 
mal. Since France was obliged to at least 
make a pretence of observing her treaties 
with England and the laws of neutrality, 
she could not permit a trial of American 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
III, 189, 193, Franklin to Committee of Foreign 
Affairs, May 26, 1779. 

2. Collections of New York Historical So- 
ciety, Deane Papers, IV, 159. 



Navy of the American Revolution 267 

prize cases in her admiralty courts. Conse- 
quently, prizes captured by American ves- 
sels were disposed of without trial and legal 
condemnation; they were taken into the 
offing of French ports and secretly sold to 
French merchants at a great sacrifice to the 
captors. After February, 1778, the prizes 
were legally tried, but not according to a 
uniform practice. Some cases were tried 
by the French admiralty courts ; but in other 
cases the French courts prepared the proces 
verhaux, which they sent to Franklin; he 
then condemned the prizes and ordered the 
court to sell them. After July, 1780, Frank- 
lin ceased to exercise such judicial func- 
tions.^ 

One of the objects of the cruises of Conti- 
nental vessels in European waters was to 
capture Englishmen and exchange them for 
American naval prisoners languishing in 
prisons in England. These imprisoned 
Americans were confined chiefly at Forton 
prison at Portsmouth, and Mill prison at 
Plymouth. A list of prisoners confined at 
Mill prison during the Revolution, which 
contains 947 names, has been made out.^ In 
April, 1782, there were eleven hundred 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
III, 801-03, 880-81; Bigelow's Franklin, VII, 
54-55, 58-59. 

2. Pennsylvania Packet, May-June, 1782. 
Another list will be found in New England 
Historical and Genealogical Register for 1865, 
74, 136, 209. 



268 Navy of the American Revolution 

Americans in the jails of England and Ire- 
land, all committed to prison as charged 
with high treason.^ A few Americans were 
confined at Gibraltar. These prisoners often 
suffered greatly from a lack of sufficient food, 
clothing, bedding, and fuel. This was in 
part caused by the cruelty and fraud of 
those whom the British government en- 
trusted with the supply and control of its 
prisons. The rigors of their captivity were 
softened, and their deprivations in a meas- 
ure relieved by money which Franklin sent 
from Paris, and by private subscriptions in 
their behalf made by generous English- 
men. 

To escape their penury and distress some 
prisoners enlisted in the enemy's navy, or 
joined the British whaling fleets. Others 
escaped from prison; some of these burrowed 
their way out, committing treason through 
His Majesty's earth, to use a phrase of Cap- 
tain Conyngham, who, with sixty compan- 
ions, in this way escaped from Mill prison 
in November, 1779. These escaped prison- 
ers gradually found their way into Holland, 
the seaports of France, or even Paris; and 
they often became a tax upon Franklin's 
pity, and the Continental treasury in his 
keeping. Franklin was deeply moved by 
the sufferings of these men, whether con- 
fined in England or at liberty in France. His 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
V, 326-27. 



Navy of the American Revolution 269 

efforts in their behalf are an important part 
of his work and achievements in France. 

A long correspondence directed towards 
securing an exchange of Englishmen cap- 
tured by American vessels and confined in 
France for Americans confined in England 
was conducted by Franklin with his friend 
Hartley in England. Hartley was a noble- 
minded and humane Englishman, who was, 
at the time, a member of the House of Com- 
mons. The first letters on the exchanging 
of prisoners were written, however, by the 
American Commissioners, to Lord Stor- 
mdnt, the British Ambassador at Paris. 
The Commissioners -stated that Captain 
Wickes, of the Continental cruiser ^'Re- 
prisal," had in his possession one hundred 
captured British seamen, and they wished 
to exchange them for an equal number of 
American seamen, prisoners in England. 
The first letter of the Commissioners Lord 
Stormont ignored. To the second letter, 
or possibly to the third, he replied in those 
well-known words: 'The King's Ambas- 
sador receives no applications from rebels, 
unless they come to implore His Majesty's 
mercy." The reply of the Commissioners 
was equally spirited: ''In answer to a let- 
ter which concerns some of the most ma- 
terial interests of humanity, and of the two 
nations. Great Britain and the United States 
of America, now at war, we received the en- 
closed indecent paper, as coming from your 



270 Xaz'x of the American Revolution 

Lordship, which we return for your Lord- 
ship's more mature consideration/'^ 

Until after the treaties of February, 1778, 
between the United States and France, 
Great Britain resisted the exchange of naval 
prisoners, confined in England, on three 
grounds : that it involved the recognition of 
belligerent rights in the insurgents; that 
France being neutral, the Colonists would be 
compelled either to free captured British 
seamen taken in European waters, or else 
to take them to America; and that since 
British seamen were far more numerous 
than American, an exchange would tell more 
favorably for the Americans than for the 
British.^ Not until France had entered into 
the war, did Britain take a broader and 
more generous position, and begin to listen 
to Franklin's overtures for an exchange of 
prisoners. During 1778 the negotiations 
proceeded slowly and vexatiously, and it 
was not until March, 1779, that the first ex- 
change was made. One hundred American 
prisoners from the Mill prison at Plymouth 
were then sent to France by the British gov- 
ernment in the Milford cartel-ship; and in 
August one hundred more were exchanged. 

In October, 1779, when Captain Jones ter- 



1. Hale's Franklin in France, I, Chapter 
XI, American Prisoners, prints many original 
letters. 

2. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II. 724. 



Navy of the American Revolution 2^1 

minated his famous cruise, he carried into 
the Texel, Holland, 472 prisoners; and Frank- 
lin had high hopes that at last considerable 
numbers of the unfortunate American 
prisoners would be released. Since the 
Texel was a neutral port, complications 
growing out of the laws of neutrality 
now arose. If Jones's prisoners were 
to be exchanged for Americans, it was 
decided that they must first be brought 
to France. Rather than risk their recap- 
ture, Franklin agreed to permit them to 
be considered as the prisoners of France 
and to be exchanged for an equal number 
of Frenchmen imprisoned in England. In 
return, the French were to give Franklin 
472 English prisoners confined in French 
prisons, which were to be exchanged for 
American prisoners. Franklin had difli- 
culty in securing the Englishmen from 
France; after England had sent over one 
hundred prisoners, misunderstandings arose, 
and in May, 1780, she refused to exchange 
Americans except for Englishmen taken by 
American cruisers. One of the main ob- 
jects of Jones's famous cruise, the releasing 
of American prisoners in England, seems to 
have partly failed.^ In March, 1782, 
Franklin considered a proposed plan for 
rescuing the American prisoners in Forton 
prison, and bringing them to France on 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
III, 535, 608, 681-82, 745-46. 



2']2 Kavy of the American Revolution 

smuggling vessels, but he concluded that 
the project was impracticable.^ 

After France and Spain entered into the 
war, the American Commissioners confined 
British prisoners in French and Spanish 
prisons. Before the French treaties, the 
Commissioners had no place, except in their 
own ships, to stow away their prisoners. 
The American captains were therefore 
forced to free many captives. They often 
exacted of a prisoner a pledge or parole that 
he would, on returning to England, be re- 
sponsible for the release of an American pris- 
oner; but of course the British government 
refused to take cognizance of such pledges, 
or to listen to the claims of the Commission- 
ers that these released captives should be 
considered as returned prisoners. Begin- 
ning with 1778, the burden upon the Com- 
missioners for the maintenance of English 
prisoners was considerable. In May, 1779, 
Franklin thought it would take more than 
100,000 livres to pay all the accounts arising 
from expenditures in their behalf.^ Could 
satisfactory and expeditious exchanges have 
been effected with England, this item of ex- 
pense would have been greatly reduced. 
When the Revolution came to an end, there 
was still a considerable number of Americans 
in English prisons. 



1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
V, 276. 

2. Ibid., Ill, 189. 



Navy of the American Revolution 273 

A number of alleged breaches of neutrality, 
said to have been made by American armed 
vessels, was brought to the attention of the 
American representatives at the Court of 
France. For example, in 1777 the French, 
Spanish,and Dutch governments complained 
that either their ships or their merchandise 
had been unlawfully captured. In 1778 
the Spanish and Swedish Courts asserted 
that Captain Conyngham had violated the 
laws of neutrals. The Dutch found fault 
with Captain Jones for sending the brigan- 
tine ''Berkenbosch" to America. In 1780 
the Portuguese Ambassador at Paris pre- 
sented Franklin with papers which alleged 
that the Massachusetts state cruiser ''Mars" 
had illegally taken a Portuguese ship and 
had sent it to New England. The American 
representatives at Paris regularly disposed 
of such cases as the above by referring them 
to Congress, and to the American courts of 
admiralty. In the case of the Portuguese 
ship, Franklin wrote to Congress that he 
hoped that it would forward a speedy de- 
cision; and that it would give orders to the 
American cruisers not to meddle with neu- 
tral vessels, for this was a practice "apt to 
produce ill blood." Complaints having 
been made of violences done by American 
armed vessels to neutral nations, the Com- 
missioners, in November, 1777, issued a proc- 
lamation enjoining the American command- 
ers to obey the laws of neutrality. In 



274 ^ci'^'y of the American Revolution 

1780, in view of the First Armed Neutrality 
which had been proposed by Catherine of 
Russia, and which was then being concerted 
by certain European nations, FrankUn wrote 
to Congress, asking whether it would not be 
proper to confine American captures to the 
principle that ''free ships shall make free 
goods, ^' since it was likely that this would 
become the law of nations.^ 

Many miscellaneous duties, more or less 
naval in character, fell to the Commission- 
ers at Paris and to their successor, the Amer- 
ican Minister. In August, 1778, the Com- 
missioners offered a few observations on 
some regulations for prizes and prisoners, 
which Sartine, the French Minister of Mar- 
ine, had prepared with a view of making uni- 
form certain rules of France and the United 
States on these subjects.^ In June, 1778, 
Franklin issued a curious passport in the 
form of a proclamation to all commanders 
of American armed vessels, not to attack a 
certain British vessel, which was bound to 
the Moravian mission on the coast of Lab- 
rador. ''I do therefore hereby [inform you] 
that the sloop 'Good Intent,' burthen about 
75 tons, Capt. Francis Mugford, carrying 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 425, 435, 784, 827; IV, 24, 180; Stevens's 
Facsimiles, 1967, 1969; Bigelow's Franklin, 
VII, 308; C. H. Lincoln, Calendar of John Paul 
Jones Manuscripts, 163. 

2. .^^harton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II. 682-83, 684-87. 



Navy of the American Revolution 275 

in the present voyage about 5000 bricks for 
building chimneys, with provisions and 
necessaries for the missionaries and their as- 
sistants, and some ironmongery and tin ware 
for the Indians — the crew consisting of the 
Captain, Mate, three men, and a boy, and 
the passengers one man and three women — 
is the vessel employed in the above service 
this yesLv/'^ Coming amid the cruelties, re-- 
sentments, and misunderstandings of war, 
this document, which breathes a humane 
spirit and declares that the philanthropic in- 
terests of nations are inviolable, is indeed a 
most welcome one. In October, 1778, the 
Commissioners provided the Ambassador 
of Naples at the Court of France, whose 
country had lately opened its ports to Amer- 
ican vessels, with a description of American 
flags. After describing the flag of the Unit- 
ed States, they added: ''Some of the States 
have vessels of war distinct from those of 
the United States. For example, the ves- 
sels of war of the state of Massachusetts 
Bay have sometimes a pine tree; and those 
of the state of South Carolina a rattlesnake 
in the middle of thirteen stripes. Merchant 
ships have only thirteen stripes, but the 
flag of the United States ordained by Con- 



1. Hale's Franklin in France, I, 245. 
Franklin issued a similar proclamation in be- 
half of the celebrated navigator, Captain Cook. 
— Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, III, 
75. 



276 Navy of the American Revolution 

gress is the thirteen stripes and the thirteen 
stars above described."^ 

The Naval Office at Paris served as a 
channel for the communication of foreign 
naval intelligence; it also proposed to Con- 
gress several important naval plans. John 
Adams, while Commissioner, and later while 
on a diplomatic mission in Holland, wrote 
long letters to Congress on the armament of 
the foreign navies, the movements of the 
British, French, and Spanish fleets, and the 
captures made by these fleets. In Novem- 
ber, 1776, Silas Deane, always fertile in 
schemes, proposed to the Committee of Se- 
cret Correspondence the sending of frigates 
against the Newfoundland fisheries; after 
destroying these, the frigates were to sail 
for the Baltic and cruise after the enemy's 
ships bound for Russia. In the same letter 
he proposed a second project. A number of 
frigates with merchantmen under their con- 
voy should be loaded with tobacco, rice, 
wheat, and other colonial products, and 
should sail for Bordeaux. After unloading 
their cargoes and refreshing their crews the 
frigates should strike a blow on the British 
coast which wo aid "alarm and weaken Great 
Britain most effectually. The city of Glas- 
gow might at any hour be destroyed by 
a single frigate capable of landing two hun- 
dred men." After their descent on England 

1, Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 759-60. 



iVai'V of the Araerican Revolution 2yy 

the frigates should sail northward and in- 
tercept the Baltic ships, or else return to 
France and wait for a good opportunity to 
strike a second blow. Ships engaging in 
such expeditions could obtain any number 
of recruits in France. By issuing commis- 
sions, individuals would ''join you in the ad- 
venture under your flag, with stout frigates, 
several of which are now building absolutely 
with the design, viz., the hopes of getting 
into the service of the United States of 
North America.''^ Deane^s letters at this 
time are somewhat extravagant, nor are 
they always based on an accurate knowledge 
of the facts. ''Would it not be well,^' he 
asks, "to purchase at Leghorn five or six 
stout Frigates, which might at once trans- 
port some companies of Swiss and a quan- 
tity of stores and the whole be defended by 
the Swiss soldiers on their passage?"^ 

In May, 1777, the recommendations made 
by Deane in November, 1776, were in sub- 
stance repeated by the Commissioners at 
Paris to the Committee of Foreign Affairs. 
These new recommendations were in all 



. 1. Collections of New York Historical So- 
ciety, Deane Papers, I, 339-40. The letter of 
Deane here published, it is believed, was writ- 
ten to the Committee of Secret Correspon- 
dence, and not to the Secret Committee as 
given. 

2. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 199. Deane to Committee of Secret Cor- 
respondence, November 28, 1776. 



278 Navy of the American Revolution 

probability drafted by Deane. The Com- 
missioners thought that a blow might be 
struck on the coast of England which would 
''alarm and shake Great Britain, and its 
credit, to the center/^ The burning and 
plundering of Liverpool or Glasgow would 
do more essential service to the Colonies 
than a million of treasure and blood spent in 
America. It would raise our reputation to 
the highest pitch, and lessen in the same de- 
gree that of our enemy. The Commission- 
ers were confident that the plan was prac- 
ticable, and could be carried out with very 
little danger. They also recommended the 
sending of two or three Continental frigates 
with some small cruisers into the German 
ocean, where, about the middle of August, 
they might seize the greater part of the en- 
emy's Baltic and northern trade. One 
frigate, they said, would be sufficient to de- 
stroy the ''Greenland whale fishery, or take 
the Hudson Bay ships returning."^ 

In the fall of 1778 the Commissioners called 
the attention of both the Committee of For- 
eign Affairs and the French Minister of Ma- 
rine to the ease with which a single frigate or 
privateer of twenty or twenty-four guns 
could capture the valuable whale fishery 
which the English maintained off the coast 
of Brazil. The seventeen vessels employed 
in this industry were manned and officered 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 324-27. 



Navy of the American Revolution 279 

almost entirely by Americans belonging to 
Nantucket and Cape Cod. These men had 
been captured by Great Britain, and having 
been given their choice of entering the Brit- 
ish naval service or the whale fishing indus- 
try, had chosen the latter. By their re- 
capture four hundred and fifty of the best 
kind of American seamen would be added to 
the Continental service, and moreover the 
cargoes of oil which would be taken were 
very valuable.^ 

In December, 1777, the Committee of 
Foreign Affairs proposed to the Commis- 
sioners at Paris the most extensive naval 
expedition planned for the Continental fleet 
during the Revolution. The plan was to 
be carried out by two or three of the frigates 
which the Marine Committee were sending to 
France. These, being well manned, were 
early in February, 1778, to be despatched to 
the French island of Mauritius in the In- 
dian ocean, where they should refit and re- 
plenish their stores. The frigates should 
next proceed to the Coromandel Coast, a 
twenty days' sail from Mauritius. Here 
they should intercept the enemy's China 
ships, and also distress the internal trade of 
India. The prizes could be sold in Mauritius 
and the proceeds sent to Paris by bills of ex- 
change. Goree was recommended as a bet- 
ter port of call than the Cape of Good Hope, 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 818-19, 832-33. 



28o Navy of the American Revolution 

where there was danger to be apprehended 
from British vessels. In the same letter 
the Committee wrote that ''another bene- 
ficial attempt may be conducted along the 
coasts of Africa. The French and Dutch 
settlements, and perhaps the Portuguese, 
will purchase the prizes, and give bills on 
Europe."^ No reply was made by the Com- 
missioners relative to the proposed East In- 
dian expedition until in July, 1778, when 
Arthur Lee wrote to the Committee of For- 
eign Affairs that the Commissioners con- 
sidered the plan ''impracticable at the pres- 
ent." "Better order," he said, "must be 
established in our marine, and the ships' 
companies better sorted, before it will be 
safe to attempt enterprises at such a dis- 
tance, and which require a certain extent of 
ideas in the captain and entire obedience in 
the crew."^ One must agree with Lee's con- 
clusion, although more weighty objections 
to the complicated plan of che Committee 
might be adduced. 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 440-41. 

2. Ibid., 673-74. 



CHAPTER X 

NAVAL DUTIES OF AMERICAN REPRE- 
SENTATIVES IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES 

(ConitJiued) 

In 1777 the work of the Naval Office at 
Paris was greater and more varied than 
during any other year. Naval vessels were 
both built and purchased. Continental 
ships, and merchantmen chartered from the 
French, were laden for America with mus- 
kets, cannon, powder, cordage, duck, tents, 
blankets, and clothing. The naval prison- 
ers in England and the violations of neutral 
rights committed by Continental ships and 
by privateers demanded much attention. 
In the spring the Continental brig ''Lexing- 
ton," and in the fall the ''Raleigh," "Al- 
fred," and "Independence," arrived in 
France. The "Reprisal," 16, "Lexington," 
14, "Dolphin," 10, "Surprise," 10, and "Re- 
venge," 14, were fitted and refitted in French 
ports and sent cruising off the British coasts ; 
and the prizes of these vessels were sold in 
France. The "Dolphin," "Surprise," and 
'Revenge" were officered and manned in 



282 Nary of the American Revolution 

France. The task of conducting all these 
naval activities in a neutral country the 
Commissioners found to be a most delicate 
one. 

Among the earlier undertakings of the 
American representatives at Paris were 
their attempts to obtain the freedom of 
French ports for American vessels. Nor 
was their work of this sort confined wholly 
to the French Court, for in the spring of 
1777 Arthur Lee sought at Madrid permis- 
sion for American vessels to sell their prizes 
and to refit in Spanish ports; and later in 
the year he went on a similar errand to Ber- 
lin. Both the Spanish and Prussian Courts 
refused his requests.^ Prizes were, how- 
ever, without difficulty secretly disposed of 
in Spain. 

As early as August, 1776, Deane wrote 
from Paris that he was *'not without hopes 
of obtaining liberty for the armed vessels of 
the United Colonies, to dispose of their 
prizes in the ports of this Kingdom, and also 
for arming and fitting out vessels of war di- 
rectly from hence. ^'^ When Franklin ar- 
rived in France, early in December, 1776, 
he carried instructions for the Commission- 
ers to apply immediately to the Court of 
France for the protection of its ports to 



1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 296-97, 355-58, 370. 

2. Ibid., 119-20, Deane to Committee of 
Secret Correspondence, August 18, 1776. 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 283 

American ships of war, privateers, and 
prizes. If this favor were granted, he was 
to ask for permission to sell American prizes 
and their cargoes in French ports. In case 
both requests met with favorable responses, 
the Committee of Secret Correspondence 
would obtain the consent of Congress to em- 
power the Commissioners to appoint a judge 
of admiralty in France; this judge would try 
all American prize cases, arising in the ports 
of France, in accordance with the rules and 
regulations of Congress. Pending the ob- 
taining of the consent of Congress, the Com- 
missioners were authorized to consult with 
the French Ministry whether it would per- 
mit the erection of American admiralty 
courts in France and the French West In- 
dies.^ Of course France could not grant 
such requests as these if she wished to re- 
main at peace with England. During 1776 J 
the Americans generally overestimated the A 
friendliness of France. They either failed ' 
to see that the laws of neutrality must set 
quite definite limits to her overt favors, or 
else they thought her eager for an excuse to 
go to war with Great Britain. The attitude 
of France towards permitting American ves- 
sels of war and their prizes the freedom of 
French ports was disclosed sooner than the 
Commissioners had reason to expect. 

It is remembered that the ''Reprisal" ar- f" 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 178-79. 



284 iVaz'3' of the American Revolution 

rived in France with Franklin on board 
early in December, 1776. She was the first 
Continental vessel to reach European wa- 
ters. Not far from the French coast she 
captured two small British brigantines, and 
carried them into Nantes. These were the 
first American prizes to enter French ports. 
It may be guessed that the captains of the 
two prizes were not long in communicating 
with Lord Stormont, the British Ambassa- 
dor at Paris, and that Lord Stormont was 
not long in communicating with the French 
government. On December 17 he held a 
conference with Vergennes, the French Min- 
ister of Foreign Affairs, to whom he de- 
clared that the prizes were unlawfully cap- 
tured, since the ''Reprisal" had no commis- 
sion from a sovereign power as a letter of 
marque; that he expected that the prizes 
would be immediately restored to their own- 
ers; and that the permitting of their sale 
would be a violation of the treaty of Utrecht 
between Great Britain and France. Though 
conciliator}^ Vergennes's reply was not al- 
together satisfactory to the British Ambas- 
sador, who records that the French Minister 
ended ''with expressions which seemed to 
shew an Intention of taking some Middle 
Way, and leaving the Point undetermined."^ 
During 1777 Lord Stormont held many 



1. Stevens's Facsimiles, 1392, 1-2, Lord 
Stormont to Lord Weymouth, December 18, 
1776. 



Navy of the American Revolution 285 

similar conferences with Vergennes in which 
the naval liberties permitted the Americans 
in French ports were the subject of discus- 
sion. Vergennes set forth the position of 
his government in a way that was reason- 
ably acceptable to England. He declared 
that its purpose was to prevent every vio- 
lation of its treaties and of the law of na- 
tions. He gave orders that the prizes cap- 
tured by the Americans should not be sold 
in French ports. At different times he 
commanded the American vessels of war to 
sail within twenty-four hours from French 
harbors. When the British wrath flamed 
out at some overt act of the Americans, Ver- 
gennes appeased it by vigorous and decisive 
acts of repression, aimed at the American 
captains and agents. A past master in 
soft and plausible answers, he excused fla- 
grant violations of British rights by explain- 
ing that every government had some tem- 
pestuous spirits which were hard to control, 
and that the '^avidity of gain" in merchants 
could not always be restrained. 

The British government could not object 
to the public acts of the French government, 
or to the reception which it gave to the 
American Commissioners, whom it received 
^'privately with all civility,'^ but avoided an 
open reception, as it was ' 'cautious of giving 
umbrage to England." As regards its ob- 
servance of the treaty of Utrecht, and its in- 
ability to grant the freedom of its ports to 



286 A^az'y of the American Revolution 

American vessels and their prizes, its dec- 
larations to the Commissioners were in line 
with those which it made to Lord Stormont. 
On the other hand, the Commissioners were 
given to understand, through secret and in- 
formal channels, that the Colonies had the 
sympathy of the French government; that 
so far as was consistent with French treaties, 
they might expect favors and indulgences; 
that the ports of France were open to Amer- 
ican ships ''as friends;'^ that ways of dispos- 
ing of American prizes which would not be 
offensive to England might be found; and 
that other irregularities would be permitted 
unnoticed.^ The Commissioners pressed their 
favors as far as they could safely go ; indeed, 
so far, that at one time they endangered the 
continuance of their friendly relations with 
the French Court. 

The two prizes which the ''Reprisal" car- 
ried into Nantes in December, 1776, were ta- 
ken into the offing of that port and privately 
sold. The "Reprisal" was quietly refitted, 
and in February, 1777, she made a cruise 
off the coast of Spain and returned to L' Or- 
ient with the Falmouth packet and four 
other English vessels. Lord Stormont made 
vigorous remonstrances. The French gov- 
ernment at once ordered the "Reprisal" and 
her prizes to put to sea within twenty-four 
hours. Nothing of this sort was done. The 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence^ 
II, 283-84, 364, 379. 



Navy of the American Revolution 287 

* 'Reprisal'' remained in port, on the ground 
that she had sprung a leak; and her prizes 
were secretly sold for one-seventh of their 
value to French merchants, who, for the 
sake of large profits, eagerly overlooked the 
irregularity of the transaction.^ Confident 
of the accuracy of the cues they were re- 
ceiving, the Commissioners now fitted out, 
manned, and officered at Dunkirk the ''Sur- 
prise,'' Captain Gustavus Conyngham, and 
early in May, 1777, sent her cruising. With- 
in a few days after his leaving Dunkirk, 
Conyngham returned with the Harwich 
packet, and one other prize. The storm 
raised by the British at so open and un- 
doubted a violation of their rights could be 
pacified only by more rigorous measures. 
The French government therefore impris- 
oned Captain Conyngham and his crew, 
and returned his prizes to their owners.^ 

Not at all disconcerted, the Commission- 
ers fitted out a fleet, consisting of the "Re- 
prisal," "Lexington," and "Dolphin," to in- 
tercept the Irish linen ships. Captain 
Wickes was placed at its head as commo- 
dore, and was instructed not to return to 
France unless he found it absolutely neces- 
sary. Wickes got to sea during the first 



1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II, 379-80; Stevens's Facsimiles, 1445, 1536, 
1568. 

2. Stevens's Facsimiles, 1529, Lord Stor- 
mont to Lord Weymouth, May 8, 1777. 



288 Navy of the American Revolution 

of June. Missing the linen ships, he sailed 
quite around Ireland, and captured or de- 
stroyed seventeen or eighteen sail of vessels ; 
he "most effectually alarmed England, pre- 
vented the great fair at Chester, occasioned 
insurance to rise, and even deterred the Eng- 
lish merchants from shipping goods in Eng- 
lish bottoms at any rate, so that in a few 
weeks forty sail of French ships were load- 
ing in the Thames, on freight, an instance 
never before known/^^ The three vessels 
returned to French ports about July 1. 

Obviously there was a limit to the for- 
bearance of the English government, and 
it made it plain that this limit had been 
reached. Lord Stormont was instructed to 
tell the French government that, however 
desirous the British king might be to main- 
tain peace, he would not submit "to such 
strong and public instances of support and 
protection shewn to the Rebels by a Nation 
that at the same time professes in the strong- 
est terms its Desire to maintain the present 
Harmony subsisting between the two 
Crowns. The shelter given to the armed 
Vessels of the Rebels, the facility they have 
of disposing of their Prizes by the conni- 
vance of Government, and the conveniences 
allowed them to refit, are such irrefragable 
proofs of support, that scarcely more could 



1. Stevens's Facsimiles, 703, 1539; Whar- 
ton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 379-80, 
Deane to Robert Morris, August 23, 1777. 



Navy of the American Revolution 289 

be done if there was an avowed Alliance be- 
tween France and them, and We were in a 
state of War with that Kingdom."^ 

This last cruise of Wickes al-so threatened 
to endanger the friendliness of the French 
Court and the Commissioners. Vergennes 
wrote to them with some spirit, and insinu- 
ated that they had broken their promises. 
''After such repeated advertisements," he 
said, "the motives of which you have been 
informed of, we had no reason to expect, 
gentlemen, that the said Sieur Wickes would 
prosecute his cruising in the European seas, 
and we could not be otherwise than greatly 
surprised that, after having associated the 
privateers the Lexington and the Dolphin 
to infest the English coast, they should all 
three of them come for refuge into our ports. 
You are too well informed, gentlemen, and 
too penetrating, not to see how this conduct 
affects the dignity of the king, my master, 
at the same time it offends the neutrality 
which his majesty professes." 

In their reply the Commissioners exhib- 
ited some knowledge of the pleasing 
phrases of diplomacy. They said that 
they were 'Very sensible of the protection 
afforded to us and to our commerce 
since our residence in this kingdom, 
agreeable to the goodness of the king's 
gracious intentions and to the law of na- 

1 Stevens's Facsi niles, 1562, Lord Wey- 
mouth to Lord Stor.Tiont, July 4, 1777. 



290 iVaz'v of the American Revolution 

tions, and it gives us real and great concern 
when any vessels of war appertaining to 
America, either through ignorance or in- 
attention, do anything that may offend his 
majesty in the smallest degree." They 
tried to shift the blame of their captains' re- 
turn to French ports to the British men of 
war that had chased the American vessels 
into safe retreats. ''We had/' they con- 
tinued, ''some days before we were honored 
by your excellency's letter, dispatched by an 
express the most positive orders to them to 
depart directly to America, which they are 
accordingly preparing to do." There can 
be no doubt about the honesty of these or- 
ders, for it was plain to the Commissioners 
that the French government was not dis- 
posed to forgive further infringements of 
neutral rights. By express orders of the 
French king the fleet of Wickes was seques- 
tered until it gave security that it should 
return directly to America.^ 

Meantime the Commissioners had ob- 
tained the release of Conyngham and his 
crew. He was now placed in command of 
the "Revenge;" and in July, eluding the 
British, he sailed from Dunkirk, ostensibly 
for America. He first cruised along the 
eastern coast of England, into the North 

1. Stevens's Facsimilies, 1677; Wharton, 
Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 364-66, Ver- 
gennes to Commissioners at Paris, July 16, 
1777, and Franklin and Deane to Vergennes, 
July 17, 1777. 



Navy of the American Revolution 291 

Sea and the region of the Baltic, then back 
through the straits of Dover and into the 
Irish Channel, and finally into the Bay of 
Biscay, anchoring at Ferrol, Spain, about 
the first of October. The terror of his 
name, which his recklessness and daring 
greatly increased, spread great alarm among 
the inhabitants of the British Isles. He 
did not return again to France with the 
' 'Revenge." This fact made his cruise less 
annoying to the Commissioners, than the 
last cruise of Wickes. Hodge, the agent of 
the Commissioners, who had given bond to 
the French admiralty that the ' 'Revenge" 
would not engage in operations against the 
British, was arrested and thrown into the 
Bastile; and Vergennes wrote a most severe 
letter, to be shown to the Commissioners. 
Presently, when the wrath of the British 
had abated, Hodge was released on the rep- 
resentation of the Commissioners that he 
was a person of character, and that they 
could not ''conceive him capable of any will- 
ful offence against the laws of this nation."^ 
About the middle of September the "Re- 
prisal" and the "Lexington" sailed for Amer- 
ica; the "Reprisal" foundered on the Grand 



1. C, HT Jones, Captain Gustavus Conyng- 
ham, 15-17; Outlook for January 3, 1903, 
71-83, _ James Barnes, Tragedy of the Lost 
Commission; Hale's Franklin in France, I, 139; 
Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 375, 
377. 406. 



292 Navy of the American Revolution 

Banks of Newfoundland, losing all on board 
except the cook; and the ' 'Lexington" was 
taken by the British off Ushant. With the 
departure of these vessels the movements of 
the Continental fleet for 1777 in European 
waters came to an end; as did also the nice 
task of the Commissioners of conducting a 
naval war from a neutral country as a base, 
without losing the friendship of that coun- 
try, or involving it in war. Had not hos- 
tilities broken out in 1778 between France 
and England by reason of other causes, a 
repetition of the naval operations of 1777, if 
permitted by the French, would very 
likely have brought them on. 

During 1778 two cruises were made in Eur- 
opean waters, one by Captain Tucker, and 
the other by Captain Jones. On April 1, 
1778, the frigate '^Boston," Captain Samuel 
Tucker, arrived at Bordeaux with John 
Adams, the new Commissioner who was to 
succeed Silas Deane, as a passenger. After 
refitting, Tucker made a short cruise in 
which he captured four prizes. In August 
the ''Boston," in company with the frigate 
* 'Providence," and the ship "Ranger," 
sailed for America. Some months previous 
the "Ranger," when under the command 
of Captain Jones, had made an' important 
cruise. Jones arrived in this vessel in 
France on December 2, 1777. He expected 
to receive command of a frigate or a ship 
of the line; but in this he was disappointed. 



Navy of the American Revolution 293 

On January 18, 1778, the Commissioners 
wrote to him that they could not procure 
such a ship as he expected ; and that they ad- 
vised him, ''after equipping the 'Ranger,' 
in the best manner for the cruise you pro- 
pose, '^ to proceed "with her in the manner 
you shall judge best for distressing the en- 
emies of the United States, by sea or other- 
wise, consistent with the laws of war and the 
terms of your commission/'^ 

From these orders it may be seen that 
Jones had in mind a descent on the British 
coast. On April 10, 1778, he sailed for the 
Irish sea. After capturing or destroying 
four vessels, he made an unsuccessful at- 
tempt to burn the shipping at Whitehaven in 
Cumberland. He next tried to take pris- 
oner the Earl of Selkirk from his summer 
home at St. Mary's Isle, off the southwest 
coast of Scotland, but failed to find him. 
These movements ashore naturally struck 
terror to the inhabitants of the British Isles. 
Jones now crossed to Ireland, and in the 
neighborhood of Belfast attacked the Brit- 
ish naval ship "Drake," 20, Commander 
George Burdon. After an engagement of 
seventy-four minutes, during which the 
"Ranger" was "skillfully handled and well- 
fought," the "Drake" struck her colors. 
Jones arrived in Brest with his prize on May 



1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
II. 471-72. 



294 Navy of the American Revolution 

10.^ Many plans and suggestions were now 
made by both the Commissioners and the 
French government to supply Jones with 
some large ship from the French navy, or to 
give him the command of a small fleet, but 
they all miscarried. The ambitious and 
energetic American captain, chafing under 
his enforced idleness, was not to make an- 
other cruise until fifteen months had elapsed. 
During 1779 and 1780 the Naval office at 
Paris was chiefly concerned with the move- 
ments, conduct, and achievements of two 
captains in the Continental navy, John Paul 
Jones and Peter Landais. Never have the 
fortunes of war thrown into close association 
two men of more striking contrasts. Jones 
was ardent, hopeful, and magnetic; Landais 
sullen, quarrelsome, and repellent. Jones 
was a master of men ; from unpromising ma- 
terials, swept together by the winds and 
waves of diverse fortunes, he made most 
effective crews. Landais was seldom on 
good terms with his officers or seamen, some 
of whom were always dissatisfied and muti- 
nous. Called to play their parts on the 
same theater of war, the Scotchman achieved 
signal success and distinction, and won the 
plaudits of the French king, of Congress, 
and of his countrymen ; while to the French- 
man fell the ill-will of his own government, 



1. Sherburne's John Paul Jones, 43-53, 
Jones to Commissioners, May 27, 1778; 
Clowes, Royal Navy, IV, 11-13. 



Navy of the American Revolution 295 

the hatred of Americans, and, in his dismis- 
sal from the navy of the United States, dis- 
honor and professional disgrace. 

In the spring of 1779 Franklin — now 
American minister at the Court of France — 
the French government, and Lafayette 
planned an expedition against the coast of 
England, which had in view especially the 
striking of some of the larger English towns. 
Lafayette was to command the French 
troops which were to be lent for the expedi- 
tion, and Jones, to whom the French govern- 
ment had, in February, given the command 
of the "Bon Homme Ri chard, ^^ formerly the 
*'Duras," an old East Indiaman, was to 
command the sea forces. The '^Alliance,'' 
Captain Landais, which vessel had recently 
arrived in France from America, was to be 
a part of Jones's fleet. This plan miscar- 
ried. 

It was not until August 13 that Jones 
finally got to sea with a fleet consisting of 
five naval vessels and two privateers. The 
two chief vessels of the little fleet were the 
*'Bon Homme Richard," 42, Captain Jones, 
and the ''Alliance," 36, Captain Landais. 
These two officers had of course permanent 
commissions in the Continental navy ; the 
three French officers in command of naval 
vessels were given temporary commissions 
in the Continental navy. The expense 
of the cruise was borne by the French 
government; and the fitting out of the 



296 A^avy of the American Revolution 

fleet was superintended by Chaumont, 
the joint agent of the French gov- 
ernment and the American minister/ 
The destination of the fleet was determined 
by the French government; and the orders 
of Jones, the commodore of the fleet, were 
prepared by the French Minister of Marine, 
translated and signed by Frankhn, and sent 
to Jones by Chaumont. The fleet sailed 
under the American flag. Its principal ob- 
ject was the intercepting of the Baltic 
fleet of the enemy. 

The details of this memorable cruise are 
familiar to the reader, and need not be re- 
peated here. The fleet was scarcely at sea 
before Landais became insubordinate, as- 
serted his independence of Jones, and left 
and rejoined his commodore when and 
where he chose. Sailing first along the 
west coast of Ireland and then around Scot- 
land, Jones reached the east coast of York- 
shire, on September 23. He had by this 
time taken seventeen ships, and had made 
an unsuccessful attempt to reach Leith and 
Edinburgh, and lay them under contribu- 
tion. Off Flamborough Head Jones's fleet, 
which was now reduced to the ''Bon Homme 
Richard,'' ''AlUance," and 'Tallas," fell in 
with the Baltic trade of forty-one sail and 
convoyed by His Majesty's ships, ''Serapis," 
44, Captain Richard Pearson, and "Countess 

1. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
III. 242. 



Navy of the American Revolution 297 

of Scarborough/' 20, Commander Thomas 
Piercy. There now ensued an engagement 
between the '^Bon Homme Richard" and 
the ''Serapis/' which lasted more than three 
hours. It was one of the fiercest fights re- 
corded in the annals of naval warfare. For 
the greater part of the engagement the two 
vessels were lashed together, stem to stern, 
starboard to starboard, and wuth the muz- 
zles of their guns touching. Both ships were 
set on fire in various places, and the ''scene 
was dreadful beyond the reach of language," 
to use Jones's phrasing. The ''Bon Homme 
Richard" won the fight only through the 
brilliant daring, the remarkable naval skill, 
and the intelligence in action of her com- 
mander. She was so badly injured that 
she sank the second day after the fight; 
her own crew were transferred to the "Ser- 
apis." The loss to the "Bon Homme Rich- 
ard" was 116 men; to the "Serapis," 129. 
During the fight of the "Bon Homme Rich- 
ard" and the "Serapis," the "Pallas," Cap- 
tain Cottineau, and the "Countess of Scar- 
borough," Commander Piercy, engaged each 
other, with the result that the British ship 
was compelled to surrender. The "Alli- 
ance" took little or no part in the contest, 
as her commander was sulking throughout 
the engagement. The two prizes, the "Al- 
Hance," and the "Pallas" arrived at the 
Texel in Holland on October 3, 1779.^ 

1. Sherburne's John Paul Jones, 111-125^ 



298 A'avy of the Anierican Revolution 

A naval discord now arose, which tried the 
patience and temper of Franklin. No soon- 
er did Jones and Landais reach the Texel, 
than each wrote to Franklin making charges 
against the other. Jones accused Landais 
of gross insubordination and misbehavior 
and specifically charged him with inten- 
tionally firing into the ''Bon Homme Rich- 
ard" and killing a ''number of our men and 
mortally wounding a good officer. " The 
French government, which was inclined to 
attribute the loss of the "Bon Homme Rich- 
ard" and so many of her crew to the conduct 
of Landais, took a hand in the dispute, and 
asked Franklin to call Landais to account at 
Paris. In cases of this sort the Naval Office 
had little authority or means to effect disci- 
pline in the navy. A sufficient number of 
commissioned officers could not be assem- 
bled in France to hold a court-martial; and 
if they could, it was doubtful whether the 
Naval Office had the power to order such a 
court. Their inability to hold courts-mar- 
tial had been regretted more than once by 
the American Commissioners. Landais 
came to Paris, and Franklin investigated the 
case before friends of the two disputants; 
but satisfactory evidence and witnesses 
could not be obtained to prove or disprove 
the charges, so Franklin did the only thing 

Jones to Franklin, October 3, 1779, giving an 
account of cruise; Clowes, Royal Navy, IV, 
33-39. 



Navy of the American Revolution 299 

possible, by referring the dispute to Con- 
gress, and a properly constituted court-mar- 
tial in America. Franklin thought his in- 
quiry had one good effect, the preventing of 
a duel in Holland between the two officers.* 
On the coming of Landais to Paris, Frank- 
lin placed Jones in command of the ''Alli- 
ance.'^ After cruising through the English 
Channel to Spain, Jones, in February, 1780, 
brought his vessel into L'Orient. Act- 
ing under Franklin's orders, Jones now re- 
fitted his vessel with the purpose of return- 
ing to America with a cargo of supplies. In 
the spring of 1780 Landais began to beseech 
Franklin to restore him to the command of 
the "Alliance," and he soon raised the ques- 
tion whether the American minister at 
Paris had the power to remove him from the 
command of a vessel to which Congress had 
appointed him. His request was refused 
by Franklin in bald and vigorous terms. 
''I think you," Franklin wrote, ''so impru- 
dent, so litigious, and quarrelsome a man, 
even with your best friends, that peace and 
good order, and consequently the quiet and 
regular subordination so necessary to suc- 
cess, are, where you preside, impossible."^ 



1, Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
III, 375-77, 378-79, 535, 547-49, 562-63; IV, 
293; Bigelow's Franklin, VII, 108-09. 

2. Hale, Franklin in France, I, 327-28; 
Chapter XVII, Captain Landais, prints majiy 
original letters connected with the dispute. 



300 Navy of the American Revolution 

Later he charged Landais ''not to meddle 
with the 'AlUance^ or create any disturb- 
ance on board her, as you will answer the 
contrary at your peril. "^ About the first 
of June Jones left his vessel, and came up to 
Paris to hasten the sale of his prizes. Lan- 
dais now appeared at L'Orient, raised a mu- 
tiny on board the ''Alliance/' and, acting 
on Arthur Lee's advice, took charge of her. 
Early in July, without taking the stores 
which had been assigned to his ship, Lan- 
dais sailed for America. It was on this 
passage that he developed a strangeness, a 
madness, some say, that incapacitated him 
for his command. He was removed, and 
the "Alliance" was sailed into Boston in 
charge of her lieutenant. Landais was now 
tried by a court-martial and dismissed from 
the naval service. 

Meantime Jones and Franklin had suc- 
ceeded in obtaining from the French govern- 
ment the loan of the "Ariel." Having 
loaded her with supplies, Jones sailed for 
America on October 7, 1780; but, encounter- 
ing a storm which dismasted his vessel, he 
was compelled to return to port. On De- 
cember 18 he again put to sea; and in Feb- 
ruary, 1781, he reached Philadelphia. 

With the departure of Jones, the Euro- 
pean waters, for the first time in four years, 
were clear of the armed vessels of the Conti- 
nental fleet. The venerable Franklin, vexed 
' 17 Hale, Franklin in France, I, 330-31. 



Navy of the American Revolution 301 

with the discords and details of naval affairs, 
must have drawn a sigh of relief when the 
last Continental vessel and captain had 
withdrawn from France. The most dis- 
agreeable of his duties as ''Admiral," to use 
John Adams's word in this connection, now 
came to an end. Concerning his vexations, 
Franklin wrote to one of his agents in the 
summer of 1780: '1 have been too long in 
hot water, plagued almost to death with the 
passions, vagaries, and ill humours, and 
madnesses of other people. I must have a 
little repose."^ He had now for some time 
been writing to Congress, asking to be re- 
lieved of his naval duties. An example of 
his requests may be extracted from a letter 
of March 4, 1780, to the President of Con- 
gress: "As vessels of war under my care 
create me a vast deal of business (of a kind, 
too, that I am unexperienced in), I must re- 
peat my earnest request that some person 
of skill in such affairs may be appointed, in 
the character of consul, to take charge of 
them. I imagine that much would by that 
means be saved in the expense of their vari- 
ous refittings and supplies, which to me ap- 
pears enormous."^ 

From the beginning of 1781 until the close 
of the Revolution the duties of the Naval 



1. Bigelow's Franklin, VII, 97-98, Frank- 
lin to Jonathan Williams, June 27, 1780. 

2. Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 
III, 535. 



302 Xaz'y of the American Revolution 

Office at Paris were comparatively light. 
Few armed vessels were sent from America 
to France; and those that were, remained 
only long enough to refit, load with supplies, 
ancl receive letters and despatches for Amer- 
ica. Over such ships Franklin exercised 
little or no control. The Agent of Marine, 
not wishing his vessels to slip from his grasp 
when within the reach of orders from Paris, 
sometimes directed his captains who were 
about to sail for France to return home on a 
specified date. In May, 1782, he wrote dis- 
approvingly to Congress concerning the "de- 
lays and exorbitant expenses which have 
accrued from the detention of public vessels 
in Europe.''^ Acting under the direct or- 
ders of Morris, Captain Barry, in the "Alli- 
ance,'' in February, 1782, left L'Orient and 
cruised without success for seventeen days. 
This was the last cruise in European waters 
which was made by a Continental vessel dur- 
ing the Revolution. 

On July 10, 1781, Congress gave Thomas 
Barclay a commission as vice-consul to 
France in the place of William Palfrey, who 
had, in November, 1780, been appointed 
consul to France, and had gone down with 
the vessel on which he took passage.^ In 
addition to his strictly consular duties, Bar- 



1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress, 
137, 3, p. 313. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, No- 
vember 4, 1780; July 10, 1781. 



Navy of the American Revolution 303 

clay was authorized to ''assist in directing 
our Naval affairs."^ When Barclay entered 
upon his duties in France, our naval busi- 
ness was narrowing to the settling of ac- 
counts. He was in time, however, to rep- 
resent his country in the trial and sale of a 
few prizes, to assist in the shipping of some 
supplies, and to sell the Continental ship, 
"Due de Lauzun." In November, 1782, 
Congress appointed Barclay a commissioner 
for settling the Revolutionary accounts of 
the United States in Europe ; and in Decem- 
ber Morris gave him his instructions.^ Bar- 
clay was directed to inquire into the ac- 
counts of the agents for fitting out armed 
vessels in Europe, and to make a settlement 
with the various prize agents into whose 
hands prizes or moneys derived from their 
sale had come. Barclay's duties, both as 
consul and as commissioner, came to an end 
in the fall of 1785, when he was appointed 
to negotiate a treaty with Morocco. 

Some of the duties of Barclay as commis- 
sioner for settling accounts were in Decem- 
ber, 1783, vested in John Paul Jones. In 
accordance with a resolution of Congress, 
Franklin appointed Jones agent of the Unit- 
ed States to solicit the payment of prize 



1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress, 
137, 1, p. 463, Instructions to Barclay. 

2 Journals of Continental Congress, No- 
vember 18, 1782; Force Transcripts, 137, p. 
55, Instructions to Barclay. 



304 Navy of the American Revolution 

money, ''in whose hands soever the money 
may be detained/' arising from prizes cap- 
tured by vessels under Jones's command in 
European waters.^ Jones was engaged in 
this work during 1784 and 1785. Under 
the sanction of Thomas Jefferson, the Amer- 
ican Minister at Paris, Jones in 1786 set out 
for Copenhagen, to settle a dispute with the 
Danish Court over three of his prizes. 
These ships had been captured, in 1779, by 
the fleet under his command, and had been 
sent into Bergen, Norway. The Danish gov- 
ernment had restored them to the British. 
Jones's journey was interrupted and he did 
not reach Copenhagen until 1788. The Dan- 
ish government now transferred the settle- 
ment of the disputed claims to Paris, plead- 
ing that Jones had not sufficient authority 
to treat. By June, Jones had left Copen- 
hagen, had accepted the commission of 
Vice-Admiral in the Russian navy, and w^as 
writing from his ffagship ''Wolodimer" to 
his friend Jefferson at Paris. The Revolu- 
tionary accounts in Europe possessed the 
usual vitality, not to say immortality, of 
government claims. Certain Revolutionary 
claims of South Carolina, growing out of ex- 
penses which that state incurred in Europe 
in connection with the ship ''Indian," are 



1. Journals of Congress, November 1, 
1783; C. H. Lincoln, Calendar of John Paul 
Jones Manuscripts, 188, Franklin to Jones, 
December 17, 1783. 



Navy of the American Revolution 305 

now pending before the government at 
Washington. 

In the West Indies the chief naval station 
for the Continental vessels was St. Pierre, 
Martinique. Bound on commercial errands, 
our vessels occasionally visited St. Eustatius, 
until its capture by the British in February, 
1781; Cape Francois, Hispaniola; and in the 
late years of the war, Havana. The United 
States had commercial agents at these three 
ports. But at Martinique our vessels were 
refitted, repaired, and provisioned when- 
ever convenience suggested, or stress of 
weather compelled, the seeking of a friendly 
harbor in this part of the Atlantic. In June, 
1776, WiUiam Bingham, who had been the 
secretary of the Committee of Secret Corre- 
spondence, went to Martinique as the com- 
mercial agent of Congress; and in March, 
1780, he was succeeded by Parsons, Alston 
and Company. 

The commercial agent at Martinique did a 
varied and lively business. He was em- 
ployed in shipping supplies, obtaining con- 
voys for his merchantmen, refitting priva- 
teers, and now and then Continental vessels, 
disposing of prizes, and forwarding to Con- 
gress naval intelligence concerning the West 
Indies and Europe. Congress at times sent 
despatches and supplies to France by the 
way of Martinique; and the American rep- 
resentatives and commercial agents in 
France, now and then, communicated with 



3o6 Navy of the American Revolution 

the United States through the same island. 
In October, 1777, Bingham wrote to Con- 
gress that, if France should declare war 
against Great Britain, many prizes would 
naturally be sent into Martinique, and that 
he wished to be directed about proper forms 
and methods for trying and selling them.^ 
In December American prizes and privateers 
were being publicly received into the ports 
of Martinique, and Bingham was shipping 
arms to America on board American vessels 
under the convoy of a frigate which he had 
hired for that purpose. In January, 1778, 
the permitting of these favors was causing 
spirited letters between the ''GeneraF' of 
Martinique and the Governor of the British 
island of Antigua.^ 

During 1779 three Continental vessels, the 
''Deane," '^General Gates,'^ and "Confed- 
eracy," put into Martinique to refit, repair, 
and obtain provisions. The expense to 
which Bingham's empty treasury was sub- 
jected caused him to complain to Congress. 
The only Continental armed vessel purchased 
at Martinique was the little schooner 
''Fame," 7 guns. The commercial agent 
made this purchase on his own responsibility 
in February, 1781, in order to carry to Phila- 
delphia the news of the capture of St. 
Eustatius by the British. But unfortun- 



1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 90, p. 9. 

2. Ibid., 90, pp. 21, 27. 



Navy of the American Rcvohition 307 

ately, the ''Fame" was forced to bequeath 
her errand to a better-fated conveyance, as 
the British carried her into Antigua.^ 

Our naval affairs on the Mississippi during 
the Revolution, although conducted on a 
small scale, are not devoid of interest; nor do 
they entirely escape the glamour of romance 
which seems to touch everything connected 
with the early history of this region. Oliver 
Pollock, originally a Pennsylvanian, and a 
man of ability, integrity, and patriotism, 
who freely spent his private fortune for his 
country, was the commercial agent at New 
Orleans during the Revolution, and to him 
fell sundry naval duties. Pollock was re- 
sponsible to the Commercial Committee, the 
third committee of Congress that was simul- 
taneously purchasing and arming vessels. 
He was intelligently and heartily assisted in 
his work at New Orleans by the Governor of 
Louisiana, Galvez, ''that worthy Noble- 
man," as Pollock called him, who "gave 
me the delightful assurance that he would 
go every possible length for the interest of 
Congress."^ It is refreshing to find for once 
American and Spanish officials acting in 
concert and inspiring mutual confidence and 
affection. Early in 1777, immediately after 

1. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress, 
137, 1, p. 357. 

2. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 50, pp. 1-13, Pollock to President of 
Congress, a resume of Pollock's services as 
commercial agent at New Orleans. 



3o8 Navy of the American Revolution 

Galvez became governor, he, with sUght 
hmitations, opened the port of New Orleans 
to American vessels of war and their prizes. 
Galvez's' favors to Americans called down 
upon him the threats of the British at Pen- 
sacola to have his conduct brought to the 
attention of the Court at Madrid. 

Pollock received from Congress blank 
commissions both for officers in the Conti- 
nental navy and for privateers. One of the 
privateers which he commissioned, the " Re- 
prisal," Captain Calvert, sent into a safe 
port, in April, 1778, a prize whose cargo con- 
sisted of flour, sugar, coffee, and forty-eight 
slaves.^ In March, 1778, Captain WilUng 
and a small party of men arrived in New 
Orleans from Pennsylvania, having come by 
the way of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers. 
They captured several prizes on the Misssis- 
sippi, which were sold in New Orleans to the 
value of 137,500. One of these, the '' Rebec- 
ca," Pollock bought for Congress on his own 
responsibility. He obtained permission 
from Galvez to fit out his ship in a warlike 
manner; and he decided upon an armament, 
consisting of ''16 six pounders upon one 
Deck, 2 Bow and 2 Stern Chacers, 8 four 
pounders upon her quarter Deck, with Swiv- 
els, Cohorns, &c."^ He intended to enlist 
one hundred and fifty men and send his ship 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 50, p. 66. 

2. Ibid., 50, pp. 77-81, 



Navy of the American Revolution 309 

against His Majesty's sloop of war ''Sylph," 
which was defending Manchac on Lake Pont- 
chartrain. Pollock planned to obtain most 
of his armament from Havana, but the 
Spanish authorities refused to permit its 
shipment even after Galvez had written to 
the Cuban government.^ 

By July, 1779, Pollock had succeeded in 
obtaining and mounting twenty-four guns 
on the decks of his ship, which he had now 
christened the ''Morris" in honor of his 
well-known friend at Philadelphia. He had 
appointed a full quota of officers ; and he had 
engaged seventy-six men, with " English de- 
serters arriving daily" to swell the comple- 
ment. The captain of the "Morris" was 
William Pickles, a man found to be "cap- 
able and steady to our Cause.'' Pollock had 
now for some time been waiting for orders 
for his vessel from Philadelphia; and tired 
of delay he was on the point of sending the 
*' Morris" cruising, when a severe hurricane 
swept over New Orleans doing great damage 
to the town and its shipping. The " Morris " 
was lost, and eleven of her crew were 
drowned; the rest were rescued nine miles 
below the city clinging to the wreckage of 
their vessel. 

Governor Galvez's heart was touched by 
the loss of the Americans. He now " spared" 
Pollock an armed schooner, which was soon 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 50, p. 97. 



3IO Navy of the American Revolution 

fitted out, and by September Pickles was 
cruising on Lake Pontchartrain. On Sep- 
tember 10 Pickles had a short, but hot, dis- 
pute with the British armed sloop ''West 
Florida,^' which was forced to surrender, 
although it lost but four men to Pickles's 
eight. Pollock now fitted out the "West 
Florida," and sent her cruising on the Lake. 
On September 21 Pickles captured a small 
British settlement on the north side of Lake 
Pontchartrain. He made prisoners of all the 
inhabitants who refused to swear allegiance 
to the United States. This capitulation. 
Pollock wrote to Congress, gave them an 
undoubted right to that part of the colony 
of West Florida which lay along Lake Pont- 
chartrain; and he conceived, in language 
that sounds familiarly like that of later ex- 
pansionists, that the capitulation was "a 
proper Ground on which to claim (at any 
convenient period) the Sovereignty of the 
Soil and the Allegiance of the Inhabitants."^ 
In October, 1779, the ''West Florida" 
cruised on the Lake at the request of Galvez 
for the protection of trade. Letters from 
Philadelphia now made it evident to Pollock 
that Congress wished the naval force on 
the Mississippi to proceed to that town. 
He therefore on January 20, 1780, gave 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 50, p. 120, Copy of Capitulation of 
Inhabitants of the Settlements on Lake 
Pontchartrain, dated October 16, 1779, with 
signatures of nineteen men. 



A^avy of the American Revolution 311 

Pickles orders to sail for Philadelphia after 
taking on a cargo of tafia and sugar at Ha- 
vana; but he directed Pickles, before enter- 
ing on this detail, to join the fleet of Galvez 
and to assist in the reduction of Mobile and 
Pensacola.^ This was an undertaking which 
Pollock had long assigned to an American 
fleet and army; and since 1777 he had urged 
it most audaciously upon Congress. After 
aiding in the capture of Mobile and taking 
a small prize which she sent into that town, 
the "West Florida" proceeded to Philadel- 
phia, where she arrived about the first of 
June, 1780. Since it appeared to a com- 
mittee of Congress that the "West Florida" 
was not fit for a cruiser, she was sold, and 
her crew was assigned to other Continental 
vessels.^ Captain Pickles was placed in 
command of the "Mercury" packet and de- 
tailed to take Henry Laurens to Amster- 
dam. Here ends the story of the Revolu- 
tionary navy on the Mississippi. 

1. Records and Papers of Continental Con- 
gress, 50, pp. 123-25, Pollock to Pickles, 
January 20, 1780. 

2. Force Transcripts, Library of Congress, 
137, 2, p. 281; 37, p. 95. 



PART II 



THE STATE NAVIES 



CHAPTER XI 

THE NAVY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

With the exception of New Jersey and 
Delaware, each of the thirteen original states 
during the Revolution owned one or more 
armed vessels. Massachusetts, Connecticut, 
Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and 
South Carolina had the largest fleets. New 
Hampshire with its one ship and Georgia 
with its four galleys just escaped from 
being in the same class with New Jersey and 
Delaware. The navies of Rhode Island, 
New York, and North Carolina were small. 
The navy of no one state was so large as 
that of Congress. The total number of 
state craft, however, greatly exceeded the 
number of vessels in the Continental navy. 
The state vessels on the average were smaller 
and not so well armed as the Continental 
vessels. The states generally had less means 
for naval purposes at their disposal than had 
Congress, and were therefore not so well 
able to build large vessels. Then, too, the 
chief need of each state for a navy was to 
defend its seaports, coasts, and trade. For 
such service small craft, adapted for run- 



3i6 Navy of the American Revolution 

ning in and out of shallow harbors, rivers, 
and bays, was demanded. The states 
therefore provided themselves with armed 
boats of various sizes, galleys with and 
without sails, half-galleys, floating batteries, 
barges, and fire-ships. Besides such vessels 
as these, most of the states had a few larger 
and stouter sailing craft, mounting gener- 
ally from ten to twenty guns, and fairly well 
fitted for deep-sea navigation. The one 
state whose deep-sea exceeded its inshore 
craft was Massachusetts. 

The history of naval administration in 
the several states possesses some common 
features. It will be recalled that in most of 
the states the provincial government about 
the year 1775 was superseded by a revolu- 
tionary government, and this in turn about 
a year later was succeeded by a permanent 
state government. The revolutionary gov- 
ernment consisted of a legislative body, or 
provincial congress, and an executive body, 
or committee of safety. The permanent 
state government consisted of a legislature 
of one or two houses and an executive, 
which was either a council, or a governor 
and council. The initial naval administra- 
tion in the states usually fell to the com- 
mittee of safety, or revolutionary executive, 
which, upon the change to a permanent 
state government, bequeathed its naval 
duties to the council or to the governor and 
council. In most of the states the details 



Navy of the American Revolution 317 

of naval administration were at some time 
during the Revolution lodged with an execu- 
tive board. Some states had separate boards 
for naval and military affairs; in other 
states, one board performed both functions. 

The history of naval administration in 
the states falls into two periods, one em- 
bracing the years from 1775 to 1778, the 
other the years from 1779 to 1783. In the 
first period each state procured a naval arm- 
ament, as a rule, for the general purpose of 
providing a naval defence, and not to meet 
some specific call for armed vessels. By 
1779 the first naval craft had been largely 
captured, destroyed, or sold; and often the 
first machinery of naval administration had 
been in large part removed. In response to 
special needs for armed vessels, calls for 
which came most often from those who were 
suffering from the ravages of the British 
fleets, the states now procured additional 
vessels, and often devised new administra- 
tive machinery to manage them. 

In defensive warfare, the problem in each 
state was to provide for the defence of its 
ports, trade, coasts, and shipping. The 
offensive warfare of the state navies, which 
was quite secondary in importance, con- 
sisted chiefly of commerce-destroying, con- 
ducted along the great ocean-paths of 
British trade. The principal problem here 
was for the American vessels in leaving 
home ports and in returning with their 



3i8 Navy of the American Revolution 

prizes to elude the British vessels, which 
hovered along the American coast, especially 
at the mouths of the Chesapeake, Delaware, 
and Narragansett bays. It is always to be 
remembered that in all the states the priva- 
teers exceeded the state craft, which were 
often insignificant in comparison. 

The reader recalls that in June, 1775, the 
battle of Bunker Hill was fought, a British 
army occupied Boston, and British vessels 
sailed the New England seas with little or 
no opposition. These vessels had already 
committed depredations and ''piracies'^ 
upon the coasts and trade of Massachusetts, 
and were obstructing the importation of 
ammunition and provisions for the Conti- 
nental army. It was under these circum- 
stances that Massachusetts took her first 
step towards procuring a naval armament. 
On June 7 her third Provincial Congress ap- 
pointed a committee of nine *' to consider the 
expediency of establishing a number of 
small armed vessels, to cruise on our sea 
coasts, for the protection of our trade, and 
the annoyance of our enemies." The Pro- 
vincial Congress, which moved very cau- 
tiously, enjoined secrecy on the committee. 
On June 10 three additional members were 
added to the committee; but later in the 
day a new committee consisting of seven 
members was apparently substituted for the 
old one. On June 12 the committee ''ap- 
pointed to consider the expediency of estab- 



Navy of the American Revolution 319 

lishing a number of armed vessels " made a 
report which provided for the fitting out of 
not less than six vessels, to mount eight to 
fourteen carriage guns, and to cruise un- 
der the orders of the Committee of Safe- 
ty — the chief executive organ of the 
Provincial Congress consisting of nine 
members, three of whom were from 
Boston. This report came up several 
times between June 12 and June 20. Fi- 
nally on the latter date ''the matter was 
ordered to subside."^ The Battle of Bunker 
Hill which was fought on June 17 may have 
had something to do with this action of the 
Provincial Congress. 

On July 19, 1775, the Revolutionary gov- 
ernment in Massachusetts was superseded 
by a permanent government consisting of 
a House of Representatives and a Council 
of eighteen members elected by the House; 
the two houses were called the General 
Court. The continued depredations of the 
British now caused several endangered ports 
to ask the General Court to provide them 
with a naval defence. The part of Massa- 
chusetts which during the Revolution was 
most exposed to the attacks of the British, 

1. Journals of Third Provincial Congress 
of Massachusetts, June 7, June 10, June 11, 
June 12, June 13, June 16, June 19, and June 
20, 1775. All references to the state records 
of Massachusetts refer to the manuscripts or 
early printed copies to be found in the State 
Library or State Archives at Boston, 



320 Navy of the American Revolution 

and which was most troublesome to defend, 
was the coast of Maine, then often referred 
to as the Eastern Coast. In August, 1775, 
a petition came to the General Court from 
Machias, a town situated on the Maine coast 
a few miles west of the present Eastport, 
asking that commissions be granted to offi- 
cers and men on board two armed vessels 
which citizens of Machias had fitted out for 
the defense of their town. In response the 
General Court took into the service of the 
state the sloop ''Machias Liberty" and the 
schooner ''Diligent."^ Jeremiah O'Brian, 
one of the men who had signed the petition, 
was commissioned by the Council com- 
mander-in-chief of the two vessels; and he 
was directed to enlist a number of men, not 
to exceed thirty, for each vessel. The '' Ma- 
chias Liberty" and the ''Diligent" were in 
the service of the state until October, 1776, 
when they were discharged. About the first 
of October, 1775, Salem and Newburyport 
each asked the General Court for naval aid 
similar to that granted to Machias, but did 
not receive it.^ 

The General Court of Massachusetts next 
turned its attention to privateering. The 



1. Journals of Massachusetts House of 
Representatives, August 21, 1775. O 'Brian's 
name is found spelled in various ways. 

2. Ibid., September 29, October 2, Octo- 
ber 4, 1775; Records of General Court of 
Massachusetts, October 4, 1775. 



A^ac'3' of the American Revolution 321 

acts of the states on this head fall into two 
general classes; those which in terms estab- 
lished state privateering, and those which 
adopted Continental privateering or accom- 
modated state laws to the same. After the 
first half of 1776 all the states used Continen- 
tal commissions and bonds. Massachusetts, 
moving in this matter before Congress, nec- 
essarily established state privateering. On 
September 28, 1775, her House of Repre- 
sentatives, having such establishment in 
view, appointed a committee of seven to 
consider the "Expediency of fitting out a 
Number of Armed Vessels. '^ On October 9, 
this committee reported in favor of institut- 
ing privateering and a prize court to try 
cases of capture. On October 14 a bill em- 
bodying the committee's recommendations 
was introduced. It now passed slowly 
through the legislative mill, and on Novem- 
ber 1 it became a law.^ John Adams once 
referred to this statute of Massachusetts as 
one of the most important documents in the 
history of the Revolution. Its preamble 
was the work of Elbridge Gerry, and the 
body of the law was drafted by James Sulli- 
van, many years later Governor of Massa- 
chusetts.^ Gerry stated the sanctions for 



1. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep- 
resentatives, September 28, October 6, 9, 14,' 
17, 18, 19, 27, November 1, 1775. 

2. Austin's Gerry, I, 94-95; Works of John 
Adams, X, 37. 



322 N^avy of the American Revolution 

the law. These he found in the arbitrary 
and sanguinary acts of Great Britain, in the 
charter of Massachusetts granted by King 
WilUam and Queen Mary, and lastly in the 
resolution of the Continental Congress of 
July 18, 1775, recommending each colony 
to provide by armed vessels or otherwise 
for the protection of its harbors and naviga- 
tion. 

The Massachusetts law provided that all 
vessels convicted of making unlawful inva- 
sions or attacks on the seacoasts or naviga- 
tion of any part of America should be for- 
feited. The Council was authorized to 
grant letters of marque and reprisal to mas- 
ters and owners of vessels upon their enter- 
ing into bond faithfully to discharge the 
duties of their office and to observe the naval 
laws of the colony. Three admiralty dis- 
tricts embracing the counties on the Massa- 
chusetts seacoast were established. The 
Southern district with the seat of its 
court at Plymouth embraced Plymouth 
county and the counties to the southward; 
the Middle district with the seat of its 
court at Ipswich embraced the counties of 
Suffolk, Middlesex, and Essex and extended 
from Plymouth county to New Hampshire; 
and the Eastern district with the seat of its 
court at North Yarmouth embraced the 
seacoast counties of Maine. The form of 
procedure in these courts was fixed for both 
captured and recaptured vessels. In the 



iVazT of the American Revolution 323 

latter case salvage was from one-third to 
one-fourth of the selling price of the vessel. 
The facts in prize cases were to be tried by 
twelve good and lawful men. At this time 
the people of Massachusetts were so enraged 
at the judges of the former Provincial ad- 
miralty court that they would have univer- 
sally condemned the trying of facts in prize 
cases by judges.^ 

The Council soon appointed three judges 
of admiralty, Nathan Gushing for the 
Southern district, Timothy Pickering for 
the Middle district, and James Sullivan for 
the Eastern district. Elbridge Gerry de- 
clined the judgeship for the Middle district. 
After trying about one hundred and fifty 
prize cases, Pickering in June, 1777, re- 
signed, and was succeeded by Nathan Gush- 
ing, who now served as judge in both the 
Southern and Middle districts.^ Gompara- 
tively few cases were tried in the Southern 
and Eastern districts. Timothy Langdon 
was for a long time judge of the Eastern 
district. 

During the fall of 1775 the General Gourt 
took no steps towards establishing a state 
navy. It was at this time assisting Wash- 
ington in obtaining and arming vessels for 

1. Amory's Sullivan, II, 378-79, James Sul- 
livan to Gerry, December 25, 1779. 

2. Records of Massachusetts Council, No- 
vember 14, December 9, December 12, 1775; 
Pickering's Pickering, I, 79-80; Amory's Sulli- 
van, I, 63. 



324 Navy of the American Revolution 

the Continental military service around 
Boston. Early in December the House of 
Representatives, acting on a recommenda- 
tion contained in a letter from John Adams 
at Philadelphia, resolved to obtain statis- 
tics on the number of officers, seamen, and 
vessels, suitable for naval purposes, in the 
seaports of Massachusetts. On December 
29 the Council declared for a navy by passing 
the following resolution : ^' Whereas several 
of the United Colonies have of late thought 
it expedient and necessary to fit out armed 
Vessels for the Defence of American Liberty, 
and it appears to this Court necessary that 
Measures be taken by this Colony for our 
further Protection by Sea: Therefore, Re- 
solved that John Adams and Joseph Palmer, 
Esqurs. with such as the Hon. House shall 
join be a committee for fitting out one or 
more Vessels for the Defence of American 
Liberty."! 

The House at once appointed its members 
of the committee, which on January 12, 
1776, made a report favorable to the estab- 
lishment of a navy.2 Accordingly, on Feb- 

1. Records of General Court of Massachu- 
setts, December 29, 1775. 

2. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep- 
resentatives, January 12, 1776. On January 
11 the Council resolved that two ships, one 
of 36, and the other of 32 guns, should be 
built. On the same dajr both House and 
Council voted to recommit the resolution in 
order that the committee which prepared it 
might report on the expense to be incurred 



Naz'v of the American Revolution 325 

ruary 7 a resolution passed the General 
Court to build ten sloops of war, of 110 or 
115 tons burden, each, suitable for carrying 
fourteen to sixteen carriage guns, 6-pounders 
and 4-pounders. A joint committee of the 
two houses was appointed to build the ves- 
sels, and £10,000 was voted for that pur- 
pose.^ On the 16th the committee was au- 
thorized to contract for the building of only 
five vessels, until there was a prospect of 
procuring materials for ten; it was author- 
ized to buy five vessels, if it thought best.^ 
By July, 1776, the sloop "Tyrannicide" 
built at Salisbury, the brigantine ''Rising 
Empire" built at Dartmouth, and the brig- 
antine "Independence" built at Kingston 
were ready for sea; and by September the 
sloops "Republic" and "Freedom" built at 
Swanzey, and the "Massachusetts" built at 
Salisbury were completed. 

Meanwhile the General Court had pre- 
pared and adopted the legislation necessary 
to establish a navy. It had drafted proper 
naval forms ; and it had appointed a number 
of naval officers. A partial pay-table was 



in building and fitting the two ships. It does 
not appear that further action was taken. — 
Records of Massachusetts Council, January 
11, 1776. 

1. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep- 
resentatives, February 6, 1776; Records of 
Massachusetts Council, February 7, 1776. 

2. Journals of Massachusetts House of 
Representatives, February 16, 1776. 



326 Navy of the American Revolution 

established on February 8.^ This on April 
12 was succeeded by a new one, which gen- 
erally raised wages, and which provided for 
a number of new offices. A captain was now 
to receive a monthly wage of £8; a first 
lieutenant, £5, 8s.; a second lieutenant, £5; 
a master, £4; a mate, £3; a surgeon, £7; 
and an ordinary seaman, £2. Each vessel 
was to be provided with 115 officers and 
seamen. No better proof of the rawness of 
the naval service is needed than that af- 
forded by the regulation that recruits, 
whether officers, seamen, or marines, should 
furnish themselves with ''a good effective 
Fire Arm, Cartouch Box, Cutlass, and 
Blanket." The captains were ordered to 
recommend to the Council a list of inferior 
officers and to enlist the proposed number 
of seamen and marines. Captors were given 
one-third of the proceeds of prizes.^ 

On April 27, 1776, the General Court fixed 
the respective shares of the proceeds of 
prizes for officers and seamen: a captain 
was to receive six shares, and '^all the Cab- 
bin Furniture;" a first lieutenant, five 
shares; a drummer, one and one-fourth 
shares; a seaman, one share; and a boy, one- 
half a share. ^ On April 29, in order to en- 

1. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep- 
resentatives, February 7, 1776; Records of 
Massachusetts Council, February 8, 1776. 

2. Journals of Massachusetts House of 
Representatives, April 12, 1776. 

3. Ibid., April 27, 1776. 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 327 

courage enlistment, an advance of one 
month's wages was voted to recruits. On 
the same day it was decided that ^Hhe Uni- 
form of Officers be Green and White, and 
that the Colours be a white Flagg, with a 
green Pine Tree, and an Inscription, 'Appeal 
to Heaven.' "^ On July 26 the Council ap- 
pointed a prize agent in each of the three 
admiralty districts, whose duty was to rep- 
resent the state in receiving, trying, and 
selling prizes.^ At times the prize agents 
assisted in fitting out vessels. 

During the first half of 1776 the law of 
November 1, 1775, establishing privateering, 
was three times amended and remodelled.^ 
The law was thereby accommodated to the 
resolutions of the Continental Congress fix- 
ing the kinds of property subject to capture, 
and the respective shares of captors and re- 
captors. Doubts which had arisen as to 
the proper construction of the original act 
w^ere now removed. The procedure before 
admiralty courts was made more specific. 
In cases of captures made by Continental 
vessels, appeals were permitted from state 
admiralty courts to the Continental Con- 
gress; in all other cases, appeals were al- 
lowed to the superior state courts. In each 

1. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep- 
resentatives, April 29, 1776; Records of Massa- 
chusetts Council, April 29, 1776. 

2. Ibid. (Records), July 26, 1776. 

3. Goodell, Laws of Massachusetts, Febru- 
ary 14, April 13, May 8, 1776. 



328 N'avy of the American Revolution 

of the three admiralty districts in Massa- 
chusetts additional towns were named where 
court might be held. The towns named for 
the Middle district were Boston, Salem, Ips- 
wich, and Newburyport. 

During the summer and fall of 1776 the 
instructions and orders to the captains of 
the armed vessels were issued to them by 
the Council, having been previously pre- 
pared by a committee. The following in- 
structions, which were drafted by Thomas 
Gushing and Daniel Hopkins, were given to 
Captain John Fisk, and will suffice as a 
sample of such documents : 

"The Brigantine Tyrannicide under your 
Command being properly Armed and Man'd 
and in other respects fitted for a Cruise you 
are hereby Ordered and directed immedi- 
ately to proceed to sea and use your utmost 
Endeavors to protect the Sea Coast and 
Trade of the United States and you are also 
directed to exert yourself in making Cap- 
tures of all Ships and other Vessels Goods 
Wares and Mechandise belonging to the 
King of Great Britain or any of his subjects 
wherever residing excepting only the Ships 
and Goods of the Inhabitants of Bermuda 
and the Bahama Islands — You are directed 
not to Cruize further Southward than Lati- 
tude Twelve North nor farther East than Lon- 
gitude Nine Degrees West from London nor 
farther West than the Shoals of Nantucket. 
At all times using necessary precautions to 



Navy of the American Revolution 329 

prevent your Vessel from falling into the 
hands of the Enemy. 

"And Whereas you have received a Com- 
mission authorizing you to make Captures 
aforesaid and a set of Instructions have 
been delivered you for regulating your Con- 
duct in that matter; these Instructions you 
are Hereby directed dihgently to attend to, 
and if you are so fortunate as to make any 
Captures you are to Order them to make 
the first safe Harbor within the United 
States. — and you are further Ordered not 
to expend your Ammunition unnecessarily 
and only in time of Action or firing Alarm 
or Signal guns."^ 

Until October, 1776, the Massachusetts 
na\'y was administered by the General 
Court, committees of its members, the Coun- 
cil, and naval agents. The General Court 
for the period of its recess in May, 1776, 
placed the armed vessels in the charge of 
*'the committee for fortifying the harbor of 
Boston." By the fall of that year it realized 
that ''secrecy, dispatch, and economy in 
conducting the war" demanded a special 
executive department. Accordingly, on 
October 26 it established a Board of War 
consisting of nine members, any five of 
whom constituted a quorum. The Board 



1. Records of Massachusetts Council, Octo- 
ber 29, 1776. The naval documents intro- 
duced in the narrative on the Massachusetts 
navy are typical of similar ones in other states. 



330 Navy of the American Revolution 

of War was "empowered to Order and Direct 
the Operations of the Forces in the Pay of 
this State, both by sea and land, by giving 
the Commanders of the Troops, Garrisons, 
and Vessels of War, such Orders for their 
Conduct and Cruizes from time to time as 
they shall think proper."^ It organized by 
electing a president and secretary; and it 
rented permanent quarters near the State 
House in Boston. In December, 1776, 
James Warren, later Commissioner for the 
Continental Navy Board at Boston, was 
president of the Board of War. Philip Hen- 
ry Savage was for a long time its president. 
Savage presided at the meeting in 1773 at 
Old South Church which decided that the 
tea should not be landed.^ The Board of 
War entered upon its work with vigor in 
November, 1776. It was yearly renewed, 
until it was dissolved in February, 1781. 

The principal business of the Board of 
War was the administration of the naval, 
commercial, and military affairs of the state. 
Its naval and commercial duties were quite 
engrossing. The Board kept fairly distinct 
the activities of its ''armed" and ''trading" 
vessels. It is true that the armed vessels 
were now and then sent on commercial er- 
rands, or combined in a single voyage naval 



1. Resolves of Massachusetts, October 26, 
1776. 

2. Winsor's Memorial History of Boston, 
n. 543. 



Navy of the American Revolution 331 

and trading duties. The sloop "Republic, " 
used for a short time as a naval vessel, was 
taken into the commercial service. The 
Massachusetts Archives contain a list of 
thirty-two trading vessels owned or char- 
tered by the Board of War.^ These vessels 
visited Nantes, Bilbao, Martinique, Guada- 
loupe, St. Eustatius, Cape Francois, Balti- 
more, and the ports of North and South Car- 
olina. They carried as staple exports, fish, 
lumber, and New England rum. 

1. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, 
XL, 110-11. The influence on the naming 
of vessels of the friendly relations existing 
between the United States and France during 
the Revolution early manifested itself. On 
December 27, 1776, the Massachusetts Board 
of War changed the names of its trading 
vessels as follows: ships, "Julius Caesar" 
to "Bourbon," "Venus" to " Versailles," 
and "Friend" to "Paris;" brigantines, 
"Charming Sally" to "Penet," and "Isabella " 
to ' ' Count D ' Estaing. ' ' The brigantine ' ' Penet , ' ' 
which was named for a French merchant at 
Nantes, a member of the firm of Pliarne, Penet 
and Company, agents for the United States, 
has been sometimes confused with the brig- 
antine "Perch," which was obtained by Mas- 
sachusetts in the fall of 1777 for the sole pur- 
pose of conveying the news of Burgoyne's sur- 
render to the American Commissioners at 
Paris. The letters and dispatches were in- 
trusted with Jonathan Loring Austin, secre- 
tary of the Board of War, who after a passage 
of thirty days reached the Commissioners at 
Passy on December 4, 1777. — Board of War 
Minutes, Decembt 
in France, I, 155. 



332 Navy of the American Revolution 

As a rule the work of the Board of War in 
looking after its trading vessels exceeded its 
naval work. At times, as in the case of the 
Penobscot expedition, the naval duties were 
the important ones. A week's work of the 
Board in behalf of its armed vessels shows 
a curious mixture of orders on the commis- 
sary-general for clothing and provisions, 
and on the state storekeeper for naval 
stores ; and of directions to the prize agents, 
the agents for building armed vessels, and 
the naval captains. The General Court per- 
mitted the Board a rather free hand in its 
management of the navy. The Board car- 
ried on a considerable correspondence with 
the commanders of the armed vessels. The 
following letter written to the Board by 
Captain John Clouston of the armed sloop 
"Freedom" on May 23, 1777, from Paim- 
boeuf, France, will illustrate this correspon- 
dence from the Captain's side. Clouston's 
disregard of orthography and punctuation 
is exceptional even for a Revolutionary 
officer. 

'' Gentlemen : 

I have the pleasure of Informing 
your Honours by Capt. Fisk of the 'Massa- 
chusetts ' That on the first Instant I arrived 
safe in this Port after taking twelve Sail of 
Englis Vessels Seven of which I despatched 
for Boston Burnt three gave one smal Brigg 
to our Prisners and one Retaken by the 



Navy of the American Revolution 333 

'Futereange' which Chast us fore Glasses 
and finding she Could not Cume up with us 
she gave Chase to our Prize and toock her 
in our sight — I have Cleaned & Refited my 
Vessel and Taken in forty Tons of War like 
Stores and have bin waiting for a wind to 
go this fore days — Capt. Fisk being short 
of Provisions I have supplied him with 
foreteen Barels of Pork and Eleven of Beef 
and have Suffisantse for my Vessel left."^ 

In January, 1777, a new sea establishment 
was effected. Wages were generally raised, 
no doubt chiefly to meet their decrease 
caused by the depreciation of the currency. 
A captain was now to receive a monthly 
wage of £14, 8s.; a lieutenant or a master, 
£7, 4s. ; a seaman, £2, 8s. ; and a boy, £1, 4s. 
The offices established in the Massachu- 
setts navy, while not quite so many, were 
in general the same as those in the Conti- 
nental navy. The Massachusetts navy, 
however, had the offices of prizemaster, 
pilot, and boy, which did not occur in the 
Continental fist. Following the regulations 
of Congress, the General Court now gave 
captors one-half of their captures. The ra- 
tions for seamen were modelled on the Con- 
tinental bill of fare.^ On March 21, 1777, 

1. Board of War Letters, Massachusetts 
Revolutionary Archives, May 23, 1777. 

2. Massachusetts Resolves, January 8, Jan- 
uary 24, 1777. On December 6, 1776, six 
naval offices were established, which included a 
captain's clerk, prizemaster, and sergeant of 
marines. 



334 A^^^'v of the American Revolution 

the General Court adopted rules and regu- 
lations for its ships of war; and it ordered 
that they should be read by the command- 
ing officer of a vessel at least once a week. 
These rules, while briefer than the Conti- 
nental rules, naturally followed the same 
general lines. They show either the influ- 
ence of the Continental rules or of the Eng- 
lish rules upon which the Continental rules 
were based. The following curious rule in 
part parallels quotations made from the 
Continental rules in Chapter I: 

''And if any Person belonging to either 
of such Vessels shall be convicted of Theft, 
Drunkenness, profane Cursing, or Swearing, 
disregarding the Sabbath, or using the 
Name of God lightly, or profanely, or shall 
be guilty of quarreling or fighting, or of any 
reproachful or provoking Language tending 
to make Quarrels, or of any turbulent or 
mutinous Behavior, or if any Person shall 
sleep upon his Watch, or forsake his Station, 
or shall in any wise neglect to perform the 
Duty enjoined him, he shall he punished 
for any of the said Offences at the Discretion 
of the commissioned Officers of such Vessel, 
or the Major Part of them, according to the 
Nature and Aggravation of the Offence, by 
sitting in the Stocks, or wearing a wooden 
Collar about his Neck, not exceeding 4 
Hours, nor less than one, or by whipping, 
not exceeding 12 Lashes, or by being put 
in Irons for so long Time as the said Officers 



Navy of the American Revolution 335 

shall judge the Safety and well being of 
the Ship and Crew requires, or otherwise 
shall forfeit to the State not more than 
six, nor less than two Days Pay for each 
offence."^ 

During every year of the Revolution at- 
tempts were made to increase the Massa- 
chusetts navy. In the fall of 1777 the brig- 
antine ''Hazard" was added. On August 
6, 1777, the General Court resolved that, 
since the armed vessels at the lowest com- 
putation had netted the state £55,000, the 
Board of War should purchase or build two 
vessels mounting 28 and 32 guns, respec- 
tively. In January, 1778, it reduced the 
sizes of these vessels almost one-half; and 
finally it gave up building them.^ In the 
spring of 1779 a prize of the ''Hazard," the 
brigantine "Active," taken in April off the 
island of St. Thomas in the West Indies, 
was purchased.^ In April, 1778, the Gen- 

1. Massachusetts Resolves, March 21, 1777. 

2. Ibid., August 6, 1777; January 17, 1778. 

3. The following is an extract from the en- 
listing contract of the armed brig "Active," 
which was signed by officers, seamen, and 
marines: "And we hereby bind ourselves to 
Submit to all orders and regulations of the 
Navy of the United States of North America 
and this State and faithfully to observe and 
obey all such orders, and Commands as we 
shall receive from time to time from our Su- 
perior Officers on board or belonging to the 
said Brig Active and on board ^-.ny Such 
Boats or Vessel or Vessels as foresaid. 



336 Navy of the American Revolution 

eral Court resolved to build a frigate of 28 
guns, which would carry two hundred offi- 
cers and men.^ This vessel was built at 
Newburyport and was named the "Protec- 
tor." In the fall of 1779 it was nearing 
completion. The launching of the ''Pro- 
tector/' which was the largest ship in the 
Massachusetts navy, was a matter of more 
than usual local interest. Stephen Cross 
who was in charge of the construction of the 
frigate wrote a letter to the Board of War 
in July, 1779, which throws light upon 
the minor naval duties of the Board. 
Cross's language is somewhat involved, 
but his meaning is clear; it is hardly 
necessary to say that the "souring" refers 
to lemons. 

" Gentlemen. 

it being customary for the owners 
of Vessels when they are Launched to give 
the Workmen something Better than New 
England Rum to drink & Likewise some 
thing to Eat and also all those Persons who 



"And it is on the part of the State that such 
persons as by Land or sea shall loose a Limb 
in any Engagement with the Enemies of these 
United States of America or be otherwise so 
disabled as to be rendered incapable of getting 
a Lively Hood Shall be entitled to the same 
Provisions as the disabled Persons in the Con- 
tinental Service." — Massachusetts Revolution- 
ary Archives, XL, 20. 

1. Massachusetts Resolves, April 21, 1778. 



Nary of the American Revolution 337 

Attend the Launching Expect to be asked 
to Drink and Eat something and Especially 
Publick Vessells it will be Expected that 
something be Provided and it is my opinion 
about sixty Galls of West India Rum & 
sugars for the same & souring if to be had 
and one Quarter Cask of Wine and A Ham- 
per of ale or Beer together with a Tierce 
hams Neet Tongs or Corn Beef will be ne- 
cessary to comply with the Customs in 
these Cases. "^ 

After August, 1779, when the disaster on 
the Penobscot occurred, the naval duties of 
the Board of War w^ere slight. For a time 
the '^Protector" was the only vessel in the 
navy. With the coming in of a new gov- 
ernment under a Constitution on October 
25, 1780, there was no longer much need for 
a Board of War. According to the provi- 
sions of the new Constitution, the Governor 
was commander-in-chief of the navy; and 
he was authorized to ''train, instruct, exer- 
cise, and govern it," and to call it into serv- 
ice in time of war. On February 8, 1781, 
the Board of War was discontinued, and 
Caleb Davis, who was appointed Agent of 
the Commonwealth, succeeded to its minis- 
terial duties.^ The Governor and the Agent 

1, Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, 
XLIV, 279. 

2. Massachusetts Resolves, February 8, 
1781. Three members of the Board of War 
and two clerks were continued for a few months 
to settle the accounts of the Board. 



338 A^az'y of the American Revolution 

now shared the naval duties. The Governor 
commissioned officers, issued orders to the 
naval commanders, and was responsible 
to the General Court; the Agent had direct 
oversight of the fitting out of vessels, the 
selling of prizes, and was responsible to the 
Governor. As the Revolution spent itself 
the simplification of the administrative ma- 
chinery of the state continued. On Janu- 
ary 1, 1783, the Agent w^as discontinued. 
His naval duties fell to the Commissary- 
General.^ 

During each year from 1780 to 1783 the 
General Court made one or more attempts 
to increase the naval force of the state. It 
was spurred to action by the ravages of the 
British cruisers on the Eastern Coast. On 
March 21, 1780, two armed vessels mount- 
ing not less than ten or more than fourteen 
4's or 6's were ordered. The expense in- 
curred was to be met by the sale of the " Ris- 
ing Empire " and of the confiscated estates 
of Loyalists, and from the rents of the 
property of absentees. On March 6, 1781, 
the Agent was directed to obtain a small 
vessel of eight to twelve guns to serve as a 
tender for the ''Mars;" and on April 23, he 
was ordered to procure by hire or purchase 
two &mall craft to be employed as "guard a 
coasta." On November 12, 1782, a com- 
mittee was appointed to purchase a vessel 
of twelve or sixteen guns to be used in pro- 

1. Massachusetts Resolves, October 4, 1782. 



Navy of the American Revolution 339 

tecting the coast. On March 26, 1783, the 
Commissary-General was ordered to obtain 
a small vessel and a whale boat to cruise 
against the enemy in Casco Bay and along 
the Eastern Shore. ^ As the result of these 
resolutions, four armed vessels were added 
to the navy: in the spring of 1780 the 
''Mars;" in the summer of 1781, the "De- 
fence;'' in the winter of 1781-1782, the 
"Tartar," which was built by the state; and 
in the spring of 1782, the ''Winthrop." 

Private naval enterprise throughout the 
Revolution was exceedingly active in Mas- 
sachusetts. In 1775, some months before 
the General Court granted letters of marque, 
Massachusetts citizens, unauthorized, were 
capturing the vessels of the enemy. Scarce- 
ly a fortnight after the battles of Lexington 
and Concord men from New Bedford and 
Dartmouth fitted out a vessel and attacked 
and cut out from a harbor in Martha's Vine- 
yard a prize of the British sloop of war 
*' Falcon," 16. This act was called forth by 
the captures which the "Falcon" had made 
from the people of Buzzard's Bay. On 
June 12, 1775, the inhabitants of Machias, 
Maine, had captured the King's sloop "Mar- 
garetta," Lieutenant Moore, after mortally 
w^ounding the commander and inflicting a 
loss of fourteen men. Still other British 



1. Massachusetts Resolves, March 21, 1780; 
February 19, March 6, April 23, 1781; Novem- 
ber 12, 1782; March 26. 1783. 



340 Navy of the American Revolution 

vessels were captured off the coast of Maine 
during the summer of 1775.^ 

With the act of November 1, 1775, grant- 
ing to the Council the power to issue letters of 
marque and reprisal, all such private enter- 
prises as the above, when done under the 
authority of a commission, were legal. It 
does not appear however that Massachusetts 
granted many commissions until the second 
half of 1776. In 1777 she granted 96 com- 
missions. The best year was 1779 when she 
issued 222 commissions; the year 1781 with 
216 commissions was not far behind. The 
total number of commissions issued by Mas- 
sachusetts for the years 1777 to 1783 was 
998.^ In 1779 one hundred and eighty-four 
prizes captured by privateers were libelled 
in the Massachusetts prize courts.^ The 
privateering industry for this year was very 
active. The following is an extract from a 
letter dated May 16, 1779, written from a 
Massachusetts seaport : 

"Privateering was never more in vogue 
than at present; two or three privateers sail 
every week from this port, and men seem 



1. Winsor, Narrative and Critical History, 
VI, 564; Maclay, History of American Priva- 
teering, 52-60. 

2. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives. 
The total numbers of privateering commissions 
always exceed the total numbers of vessels, 
as the same vessels were often commissioned 
two or more times. 

3. Boston Gazette for 1779. 



Navy of the American Revolution 341 

as plenty as grasshoppers in the field; no 
vessel being detained an hour for want of 
them. We have near 1,000 prisoners on 
board the guard-ships in Boston, and a great 
balance due us from the enemy. Cruisers 
from New York, &c are daily brought in, 
and often by vessels of inferior force; our 
privateers- men being as confident of victory, 
when upon an equal footing with the Eng- 
lish, as these were of gaining it of the French 
in the last war.''* 

The rivalry between the state service and 
the privateers for seamen was exceedingly ac- 
tive. The latter service was always the more 
popular. In 1779 the Council recommended 
that some effectual measures be taken to 
prevent the owners of private ships of war 
and merchantmen from seducing seamen 
away that were engaged in the public service. 
It declared that proper encouragement must 
be given to state officers and seamen, and 
that commanders must have the aid of the 
government in manning their vessels, "or 
they will lie by the Walls and so be of little 
or no service."^ In 1778 the General Court 
found some difficulty in securing com- 
manders. 

The movements of the armed vessels of 
the Massachusetts navy are quite similar to 
the movements of the naval vessels of Con- 



1. Virginia Gazette, June 19, 1779. 

2. Journals of House of Representatives, 
January 6, 1779. 



342 iVazT of the American Revolution 

gress.^ The smaller fleet like the larger 
cruised in European waters, in the region 
of the West Indies, and to the eastward of 
the Bermudas in the path of the richly-laden 
West Indiamen. The Massachusetts ves- 
sels, however, cruised more frequently near- 
er home. About the first of June, 1779, the 
^^Hazard" and 'Tyrannicide'^ were in the 
region of Nantucket. After 1779 the vessels 
were frequently ordered to protect the 

1. The vessels in the Massachusetts navy 
with the approximate periods of their service 
were as follows: Sloop " Machias Liberty," 
1775-1776; schooner "Diligent," 1775-1776; 
brigantine (at first a sloop) "Tyrannicide," 
1776-1779; brigantine " Rising Empire," 1776- 
1777; brigantine "Independence," 1776-1777; 
sloop "Republic," 1776-1777; sloop "Free- 
dom," 1776-1777; brigantine "Massachu- 
setts," 1776-1778; brigantine "Hazard," 1777- 
1779; brigantine "Active," 1779; frigate 
"Protector," 1779-1781; ship "Mars," 1780- 
1781; sloop "Defence," 1781; ship "Tartar," 
1782-1783; sloop "Winthrop," 1782-1783; 
and galley "Lincoln," 1779-1781. Most of 
these vessels mounted from ten to twenty 
guns, 4's and 6's. The only larger vessel was 
the "Protector," 26. Vessels such as the 
"Tyrannicide," "Hazard," and "Winthrop" 
carried about 125 officers and men. The fol- 
lowing captains or commanders were the chief 
officers in the Massachusetts navy: Jeremiah 
O'Brian, John Lambert, John Fisk, John Fos- 
ter Williams, John Clouston, Jonathan Hara- 
den, Daniel Souther, Simeon Samson, Richard 
Welden, Allen Hallet, James Nevens, John 
Cathcart and George Little. Massachusetts 
did not establish the rank of commodore. 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 343 

Eastern Coast. In the spring of 1777 the 
^'Tyrannicide, " Captain Jonathan Haraden, 
''Massachusetts/' Captain John Fisk, and 
"Freedom/' Captain John Clouston, cruised 
eastward as far as the coasts of France and 
Spain, capturing some twenty-five prizes, 
many of which however, were recaptured by 
the British.^ This was a most fortunate 
venture, for all told one can not now count 
more than seventy prizes captured by the 
Massachusetts navy. In the summer of 
1780 the Board of War turned over the 
"Mars," Captain Simeon Samson, to the 
Massachusetts Committee for Foreign Af- 
fairs which sent her to France and Holland 
for suppUes. 



1. These three vessels captured the four 
prizes mentioned in the following advertise- 
ment, which appeared in the Continental Jour- 
nal and Weekly Advertiser for July 3, 1777, a 
paper published at Boston. The advertise- 
ment is introduced here to illustrate the final 
disposition of prize vessels: 

"To be sold by Public Auction at eleven 
o'clock on Wednesday the 23rd of July in- 
stant at Mr. Tileston's wharf in Boston the 
following prizes with their appurtenances. 

"The Ship Lonsdale, about 250 tons 
Brig Britannia, about 140 " 
Brig Penelope, about 130 " 
Snow Sally, about 180 " 

"The above prizes lay at Tileston's wharf. 
They are all good vessels and well found. In- 
ventories to be seen at the sheriff's office 
Cornhill, and at the place of sale. 

"W. Greenleaf. Sheriff." 



344 ^CL'<^y of the American Revolution 

The state vessels were at times joined in 
cruises with privateers or with Continental 
vessels ; and enterprises were concerted with 
all three classes of armed craft. In April, 
1777, the state took into its service for a 
month nine privateers, mounting 130 
guns and carrying 1,030 men, to cruise 
with the Continental frigate '^Hancock" 
and ''Boston'^ after the British frigate ^'Mil- 
ford" which had been especially annoying 
and destructive to the trade of the state.* 
In February, 1781, the 'Trotector" was 
cruising with the Continental frigate 
'^Deane" thirty leagues windward of An- 
tigua. In March, 1781 , the Admiral of the 
French fleet at Newport was requested to 
send two French ships to cruise with the 
^^Mars" on the Eastern shore; and a bounty 
was offered to privateersmen who would 
cruise against the 'Worthless banditti" in 
that region.^ 

The capture of a prize often amounted to 
little more than the chasing of a merchant- 
man 8.nd the firing of a few shots as a sig- 
nal for surrender. At times however when 
the merchantman was armed, or when the 
enemy 's vessel happened to be a privateer, 
the action was more serious. One of the 
most severe single engagements in which a 



1. Massachusetts Resolves, April 26, 1777; 
Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, XL, 
29, 55. 

2. Massachusetts Resolves, March 2, 1781. 



Navy of the American Revolution 345 

Massachusetts vessel was concerned was 
that between the 'Trotector/' 26, Captain 
John Foster WiUiams, and the privateer 
frigate "Admiral Duff, " 32, Captain Stran- 
ger. It occurred on June 9, 1780, in lati- 
tude 42° N. and longitude 47° W. The en- 
gagement was heavy for an hour and a half 
when the ''Admiral Duff,^' having caught 
fire, blew up; all on board were lost except 
fifty-five men who were picked up by the 
"Protector." The American vessel lost six 
men.^ The following brief account of one 
of these minor engagements, told in the sim- 
ple and direct language of the Massachu- 
setts captain who took part in it, is taken 
from a letter of Captain Allen Hallet to the 
Board of War. It is dated at sea on 
board the ''Tyrannicide," latitude 28^ N., 
longitude 68° W., March 31, 1779. This sim- 
ple and vivid description shows with clear- 
ness the character of the minor engagements 
of the Revolution. 

"I have the pleasure of sending this to 
you by Mr. John Blanch who goes prize- 
master of my Prize, the Privateer Brig Re- 
venge, lately commanded by Capt. Robert 
Fendall belonging to Grenada, but last from 
Jamaica, mounting 14 Carriage Guns, 6 & 4 
pounders, 4 swivels & 2 Cohorns, & sixty 
ablebodied Men, which I took after a very 
smart & Bloody Engagement, in which they 
had 8 men killed & fourteen wounded, the 
""T Boston Gazette, July 24, 1780. 



346 Navy of the American Revolution 



Vessell cut very much to pieces by my Shott, 
so that they had no command of her at all — 
amongst the killed was the 1st Lieut. & 
one Quarter Mr. — amongst the wounded is 
the Capt. 2nd. Lieut. & Gunner — I cap- 
tured her as follows: on the 29 Inst, at 4 
P M. I made her about 4 leagues to wind- 
ward coming down upon us, upon which I 
cleared the Ship and got all hands to Quar- 
ter, ready for an Engagement, I stood close 
upon the Wind waiting for her, about half 
past six PM. she came up with me, and 
hailed me, ask'd me where I was from, I told 
them I was from Boston & asked where they 
were from, they said from Jamaica & that 
they were a British Cruizer, I immediately 
told them I was an American Cruizer, upon 
which they ordered me to Strike, & seeing 
I did not intend to gratify their desires, 
they rang'd up under my Lee & gave me 
a Broadside, I immediately returned the 
Compliment & dropping a Stern, I got under 
their Lee and then pour'd Broadsides into 
her from below and out of the Tops, so 
fast & so well directed that in one hour & 
a Quarter we dismantled two of her Guns 
& drove them from their Quarters & com- 
pelled them to Strike their Colors, during 
the whole Engagement we were not at any 
one time more than half Pistol Shott dis- 
tant & some part of the Time our Yards 
were locked with theirs — I had Eight men 
wounded only two of which are Bad — 



Navy of the American Revolution 347 

amongst the wounded are my first Lieut. 
& Master, I intended to man her and keep 
her as a Consort during the Cruize, but 
having twenty wounded Men on board, of 
my own men & prisoners I thought it Best 
to send her home, with ah the wounded 
men on board under the Care of the Sur- 
geons Mate/'^ 

By far the largest naval undertaking of 
the Revolution made by the Americans was 
the Penobscot Expedition. Until 1779 the 
general policy of those who managed the 
fleet of Massachusetts was to send its ves- 
sels cruising against the British transports, 
merchantmen, and small privateers, and to 
leave the coast to be defended by the sea- 
coast estabhshment and by local forces. 
In August, 1777, the Council agreed with 
this policy for it then spoke of the Conti- 
nental vessels, the state vessels, and the 
privateers as "improper" to be employed 
in clearing the coasts of these " vermin. ^'^ 
In April, 1779, however, it disapproved this 
policy. It now in a message to the House 
submitted whether, instead of sending the 
armed vessels on long cruises after prizes, 
it would not have been vastly more to the 
advantage and profit of the state to have 
employed them cruising on the coast of 
Massachusetts for the protection of trade 

1. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, 
XLIV, 408. 

2. Ibid.. 268. 



II 



348 iVaz'v of the American Revolution 

and the defence of harbors and seacoast, 
^ 'which have been left in such an un- 
guarded and defenceless Situation that 
where we have taken one Vessel of the 
Enemy their small privateers out of New 
York have taken ten from us.'^^ It would 
seem that the Board of War was right in 
employing its fleet in prize-getting rather 
than in defensive warfare. The capturing 
of small privateers and of merchantmen 
were the only enterprises for which the Rev- 
olutionary fleets were adapted. Those ves- 
sels that cruised continuall}^ near the Ameri- 
can coast, sooner or later, fell foul of the 
stouter and better armed ships of the enemy. 
Moreover, the Board of War, had it not re- 
sponded to the commercial spirit of the 
times, would have been compelled to adopt 
the methods of the privateers, did it wish 
to succeed in its competition with them for 
seamen. 

During the first half of 1779 the British 
vessels were very destructive to the trade 
and shipping of Massachusetts and New 
Hampshire. On June 9, eight hun- 
dred of the enemy, encouraged by certain 
Tories in Maine, effected a lodgment on the 
Maine coast at a place called Bagaduce, now 
Castine, near the mouth of the Penobscot 
river.^ This made a fine vantage-point as 

1. Journals of Massachusetts House of Rep- 
resentatives, April 7, 1779. 

2. Amory's Sullivan, II, 376-78, James Sulli- 



N^az'y of the Ainerican Revolution 349 

a base for naval operations. The appeal 
for naval protection which the inhabitants 
of Massachusetts now made upon her was 
a strong one. Towards the close of June 
the Massachusetts government began con- 
certing with the Continental Navy Board 
at Boston and with the government of New 
Hampshire an expedition to capture and 
destroy this British station. Samuel Ad- 
ams, who had recently retired from the 
chairmanship of the Marine Committee of 
Congress and had returned to Boston, fur- 
thered the enterprise. To the fleet which 
w^as now formed. New Hampshire contrib- 
uted the ''Hampden," 22; the Navy Board 
at Boston, the Continental vessels, ''War- 
ren," 32, "Providence," 12, and "Diligent," 
12; and Massachusetts, the three state brig- 
antines, "Tyrannicide," 16, "Hazard," 14, 
and "Active," 14, together with thirteen 
privateers, w^hich were temporarily taken 
into the state service. These twenty armed 
vessels mounted in all 324 guns, and were 

van to John Sullivan, August 30, 1779. James 
Sullivan says that, on the occupation of Baga- 
duce by the British, Boston and neighboring 
seaports were greatly alarmed at the pros- 
pect of a scarcity of wood; and that men who 
had made their fortunes by war, for once 
and for a moment, felt a public spirit, and 
freely offered their ships to the government. 
They were careful to have them appraised 
and insured by the state, which of course 
suffered the loss on the failure of the expedi- 
tion. 



350 Navy of the American Revolution 

manned by more than 2,000 men. Besides 
the armed fleet there were twenty trans- 
ports which carried upwards of 1,000 state 
miUtia. The naval forces were under the 
command of Captain Dudley Saltonstall of 
the Continental navy; and the troops were 
commanded by Brigadier-General Solomon 
Lovell of the state military forces of Massa- 
chusetts. Paul Revere was Chief of Ar- 
tillery with the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel. 
The assembling, manning, provisioning, 
and fitting of so many vessels greatly taxed 
the resources of Massachusetts. The fleet 
left Boston on July 19, and during the last 
days of the month appeared off the Penob- 
scot, and attacked Bagaduce with only par- 
tial success, since it failed to take the main 
fort. Before a second attempt was made, 
a British fleet from New York under the 
command of Sir George Collier, who had re- 
ceived news of the expedition, appeared in 
the Penobscot. The British fleet consisted 
of the ''Raisonnable,'' 64; "Blonde," and 
"Virginia," 32's; "Greyhound," "Camilla," 
and "Gallatea," 20's; and "Otter," 14; to- 
gether with three small vessels at the gar- 
rison, the "Nautilus," 16, "Albany," 14, 
and "North," 14. The British fleet mount- 
ed 248 guns and carried more than 1,600 
men. In number of guns and men the ad- 
vantage lay with the Americans, but in 
weight of metal and tonnage it was probably 
with the British. On the morning of Au- 



A^az'3' of the American Revolution 351 

gust 14 the British fleet came in sight of the 
American. The two fleets were barely in 
range of each other's guns when the Ameri- 
cans were seized with a panic, and fled with 
their vessels helter skelter up the river, pur- 
sued by the British. The Americans offered 
almost no resistance whatever, but ran their 
ships ashore, set fire to them, and escaped 
afoot, when not too closely pursued. With 
the exception of two or three vessels which 
were captured, the American fleet was an- 
nihilated. The British lost 13 men; the 
American loss has been placed at 474 men. 
The larger part of the American sailors and 
soldiers returned by woods to New Hamp- 
shire and Massachusetts. 

The total cost of this expedition to Massa- 
chusetts as calculated by the Board of War 
was £1,739,175. The larger part of this 
sum, £1,390,200, was charged t@ the account 
of the navy. It suffered the loss of three 
state armed vessels and a victualer, nine 
privateers, and twenty transports. Among 
the twenty transports, with possibly one ex- 
ception, was the whole trading fleet of the 
state. Soon after the disaster a joint com- 
mittee of the Massachusetts House of Rep- 
resentatives and Council with Artemas Ward 
as president, held an inquiry and made a 
report on the causes of the failure of the 
expedition. In answer to the question, 
''What appears the principal reason of the 
failure," the committee decided unani- 



352 iVaz'v of the American Revolution 

mously, ''want of proper Spirit and Energy 
on the part of the Commodore.'' A court- 
martial, which was held on the frigate 
*'Deane" in Boston harbor about the first 
of October, decided against Captain Salton- 
stall; and he was dismissed from the navy. 
Rarely has a more ignominious military 
operation been made by Americans than 
the Penobscot expedition. A New Eng- 
lander with some justice has likened it to 
HulFs surrender at Detroit. Had it been 
successful, it would not have been worth 
the effort it cost. Its object had no national 
significance; it was an eccentric operation. 
''Bad in conception, bad in preparation, 
bad in execution, it naturally ended in dis- 
aster and disgrace."^ 

Besides the "Tyrannicide,'' "Hazard," 
and "Active" the Massachusetts navy lost 
to the enemy at least three other vessels. 
Towards the close of 1777 the British cap- 
tured the "Freedom" and "Independence." 
On May 5, 1781, His Majesty's ships "Roe- 
buck," 44, and "Medea," 28, captured the 



1. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, 
CXLV, 199-203, 350; Weymouth Historical So- 
ciety Publications, I, chapters VII-X, gives the 
best account of the Penobscot expedition, 
also contains the Original Journal of General* 
Solomon Lovell kept on the expedition ; Massa- 
chusetts Historical Society Collections, 7th, 
II, 430; Proceedings of Massachusetts Histori- 
cal Society, 2nd, XII, 201-202; Clowes, Royal 
Navy, IV, 28-29. 



A^avy of the American Revolution 353 

''Protector/' 26, with more than one hun- 
dred and thirty men on board.^ She was 
added to the Royal Navy as the ''Hussar.'^ 
In the latter half of 1782 Captain George 
Little in the ''Winthrop" cruised on the 
Eastern Coast, and captured and sent into 
Boston ''nearly the whole of the arm'd 
force they possessed at Penobscot;" he thus 
in part retrieved the naval honor of his 
state.^ Acting under orders of Governor 
Hancock, Little in the "Winthrop" made 
the last cruise of the Massachusetts navy, 
when in the winter of 1782-1783 he visited 
Martinique. On his return, he w^as fitting 
for a cruise on the Eastern Coast, when 
about April 1 news of permanent peace ar- 
rived. On June 4, 1783, the Commissary- 
General was directed to sell the "Winthrop," 
the last vessel in the navy. The "Tartar" 
had been sold during the past winter.^ 
Captain Little's accounts were being settled 
in March, 1785. 

1. Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, 
XXXIX, 45. 

2. Ibid., CL VIII, 274, Message of Governor 
Hancock to House of Representatives, Feb- 
ruary 6, 1783. 

3. Massachusetts Resolves, June 4, 1783. 
Those naval vessels which were not captured, 
destroyed, or sold, were either returned to 
their owners, or were thrown out of com- 
mission and employed in other services. 



CHAPTER XII 

THE NAVY OF CONNECTICUT 

An introductory word about the govern- 
ment of Connecticut during the Revolution 
may not be amiss. Speaking generally, the 
power of legislation was vested in the Gov- 
ernor, Council, and House of Representa- 
tives ; and of administration in the Governor 
and Council of Safety.^ The Legislature or 
General Assembly met two or three times a 
year. Jonathan Trumbull, the only Pro- 
vincial governor in the thirteen colonies who 
w^as not displaced by the dominance of the 
Patriot party, was governor of Connecticut 
throughout the Revolution. On October 
10, 1776, Connecticut, by a resolution of the 
General Assembly, which made no change 
in the frame-work of the government, ceased 
to be a colony and became a state. The 
Council of Safety, appointed to assist the 
Governor in administration, was elected each 
year. Its membership varied in numbers; 
in 1775 there were five members; in 1779, 
twenty. About half of its members attend- 

1. One must distinguish between the 
Council and Council of Safety. A few mem- 
bers were common to both bodies. 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 355 

ed its meetings, which were principally held 
at Hartford, and at Lebanon, the home of 
Governor Trumbull. Roger Sherman, Oli- 
ver Ellsworth, and other leaders of the Revo- 
lution in Connecticut served in the Council 
of Safety. 

Connecticut's first step towards obtaining 
a naval armament was made early in July, 
1775, when her General Assembly resolved to 
fit out and arm two vessels of suitable bur- 
den for the defence of the seacoasts of the 
colony, and authorized the Governor and 
Council to procure, furnish, and employ the 
two vessels.^ On July 24, 1775, the Gover- 
nor and Council of Safety thoroughly con- 
sidered the ''affair of the two armed ves- 
sels ; " and letters relating thereto from men 
in New Haven, Middletown, Wethersfield, 
and other towns were read. Captain John 
Deshon and Nathaniel Shaw, jr., both of 
New London, and Captain Giles Hall of 
Norwich attended the meeting and offered 
information and advice. A committee of 
four, consisting of two members of the 
Council of Safety together with Deshon and 
Hall, was appointed to visit the principal 
ports of the colony and ascertain the terms 

1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
99-100. The published Colonial and State 
Records of Connecticut to which I refer, con- 
sist of two parts, the Records of the General 
Assembly, and the Jounrals of the Council of 
Safety. The reader can easily tell from the 
context to which part each reference refers. 



356 Navy of the American Revolution 

upon which vessels, officers, and men might 
be had.^ 

On August 2 this committee reported that 
sundry vessels could be obtained at reason- 
able prices, but that none of them were per- 
fectly adapted for vessels of war. The com- 
mittee said that the people of the colony 
disagreed as to the propriety of arming ves- 
sels; many thought that it would be impos- 
sible for America to compare by sea with the 
British, and that to attempt it would pro- 
voke insult and would expose the seacoast 
and trade of Connecticut to increased dan- 
ger; but others thought that a naval arma- 
ment would be an advantage, and would 
afford protection to the colony. The Gov- 
ernor and Council of Safety expressed a 
doubt whether they had a right to suspend 
the measure of the General Assembly, even 
if they should think it advisable. They now 
resolved to fit out an armed vessel, the brig 
"Minerva," of about 108 tons burden, be- 
longing to Captain William Griswold of 
Wethersfield ; and to obtain a smaller and 
faster vessel of some twenty-five tons burden 
to be employed as a ''spy vessel, to run and 
course from place to place, to discover the 
enemy, and carry intelligence." Captain 
Samuel Niles of Norwich was appointed 
captain of the spy- vessel; and Benjamin 
Huntington of the Council of Safety and 

1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
108, 109. 



Navy of ihc American Revolution 357 

John Deshon were appointed a committee to 
obtain, fit out, and furnish it.^ 

On August 3 the Governor and Council of 
Safety appointed Captain Giles Hall of Nor- 
wich captain and commander of the *' Min- 
erva. " A pay-table and a small Hst of 
officers were now established. Captain Hall 
was to receive a monthly salary of £7; the 
first lieutenant, £5; the second lieutenant, 
and master, £4 each; seamen, £2, 5s.; and 
marines, £2, Hall was instructed to raise 
forty seamen and forty marines.^ 

When the committee for obtaining the 
spy- vessel reported on August 14, the Gov- 
ernor and Council of Safety resolved to buy 
the schooner '' Britannia," belonging at 
Stonington, at a price not to exceed £200. 
Robert Niles was made captain of the '' Spy," 
the name now given to the schooner, in 
place of Samuel Niles.^ The "Spy" was 
cruising early in October, 1775, when she 
recaptured and brought into New London 
a large ship containing eight thousand bush- 
els of wheat,^ the first capture of the Con- 
necticut navy. 

By October the '^Minerva" was ready for 
sea, and on the ninth of this month, in re- 
sponse to a request of the Continental Con- 
gress, the Governor and Council of Safety 

1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
109, 110. 

2. Ibid., 111-13. 

3. Ibid., 117. 

4. Connecticut Gazette, October 13, 1775. 



358 Xaz'y of the American Revolution 

ordered this vessel to intercept two trans- 
ports bound from England for Quebec.^ 
This detail was not carried out by the *' Min- 
erva" for the very sufficient reason "that 
all the hands or soldiers and marines on 
board, except about 10 or 12, being duly 
noticed of said orders, utterly declined and 
refused to obey the same and perform said 
cruise," which through their disobedience 
wholly failed.^ The Governor and Council 
of Safety ordered the mutinous men dis- 
charged, and others enlisted in their places; 
but before the ''Minerva" was again ready 
for service, the General Assembly in Decem- 
ber directed Captain Hall to return his ves- 
sel to its owner and dismiss his crew. 

In December, 1775, the General Assembly 
deciding to increase the naval forces of the 
colony, appointed Colonel David Waterbury 
of Stamford and Captain Isaac Sears of New 
Haven to examine a certain brigantine at 
Greenwich with a view to ascertaining its 
fitness for the naval service; and it resolved 
to build or otherwise procure an additional 
armed ship and four row-galleys "for the 
defence of this and the neighboring colonies." 
Waterbury and Sears reported that the 
Greenwich brigantine was a new vessel which 
had made one voyage to the West Indies, 



1. See Chapter I, Naval Committee, page 
35; Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 176. 

2. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV. 
176. 



Navy of the American Revolution 359 

and that she would mount sixteen six- 
pounders and twenty-four swivels.^ The 
Governor and Council of Safety at once pur- 
chased the brigantine, which they named 
the ^'Defence/' and appointed Captain Seth 
Harding of Norwich to command her. By 
April, 1776, the ' 'Defence " was manned and 
ready for sea. 

On January 9, 1776, the Governor and 
Council of Safety appointed Benjamin Hunt- 
ington of the Council of Safety and Captain 
Seth Harding a committee to visit Middle- 
town and other towns on the Connecticut 
river to ascertain the terms upon which the 
second vessel could be purchased or built.^ 
In the end the Governor and Council of 
Safety decided to build a ship of 200 tons 
burden at Saybrook, and they employed 
Captain Uriah Hayden at six shillings a day 
to undertake the task.^ The ship was built 
during the spring and summer of 1776. An 
important event in the history of the " Oliver 
Cromwell," as the new ship was called, is 
thus chronicled in the Connecticut Gazette 
of August 23, 1776, published at New Lon- 
don: ''Last Lord's Day, the new Ship of 
War belonging to the State of Connecticut, 
built at Say-Brook, and commanded by 
WilHam Coit, Esq., came out of the River 



1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
200-02. 

2. Ibid., 223-24. 

3. Ibid., 229, 232. 



360 Naz'y of the American Revolution 

and arrived here Tuesday: she is the largest 
Vessel that has ever come over Say Brook 
Bar, and was piloted by Capt. James Har- 
ris."^ 

Before building the row-galleys the Gov- 
ernor and Council of Safety sent one 
builder to Philadelphia and another to Prov- 
idence in order to take advantage of the 
experiences of Pennsylvania and Rhode 
Island in constructing this sort of craft. Of 
the four galleys ordered in December, 1775, 
but three were built, the '' Whiting" at New 
Haven, the "Shark" at Norwich, and the 
*'Crane'^ at East Haddam. They were rig- 
ged as schooners; and by July, 1776, their 
construction was completed and they were 
officered and manned. 

The General Assembly permitted the Gov- 
ernor and Council of Safety a free hand 
in their control of naval affairs. They were 
given full power and authority to order, di- 
rect, furnish, and supply the navy, during 
the recess of the General Assembly. It 
does not appear, however, that the sessions 
of the General Assembly caused much change 
in the management of the naval affairs. It 
was not in session longer than a few weeks 
or a few days at a time. In October, 1776, 
the General Assembly directed the Govern- 
or and Council of Safety to execute and con- 
tinue all naval business which they had be- 
gun, the sessions of the Assembly notwith- 

1. Connecticut Gazette, August 23, 1776 



Navy of the Auierican Revolution 361 

standing.^ Matters, which in some states 
were determined by legislation, such as the 
establishing of naval rules and regulations, 
the shares of prizes, and the naval pay, were 
in Connecticut for the most part left to ad- 
ministrative orders. In such work the Gov- 
ernor and Council of Safety often followed 
Continental models. In July, 1776, they 
ordered Richard Law, a member of the Coun- 
cil of Safety, to ''compile a Code of Laws 
for the Naval Service of this Colony, as 
much in conformity to the laws of the naval 
service of the United Colonies as may con- 
sist with the service of this colony."^ 

The Governor and Council of Safety trans- 
acted the naval business, as has already been 
seen, by means of committees of the Coun- 
cil of Safety, naval agents, and mixed com- 
mittees composed of members of the Council 
of Safety and men from the outside. The 
sending of prizes captured by Connecticut 
ships of war into the ports of Massachusetts, 
and the refitting of the state's vessels in 
Boston, necessitated the employment of a 
naval agent in Massachusetts. In April, 
1777, Samuel Elliot of Boston was acting 
for the Governor and Council of Safety in 
this capacity. In October, 1777, the Gen- 
eral Assembly authorized the appointment 



1. Records of the State of Connecticut, I, 
11. 

2. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
492 



362 A^avy of the American Revolution 

of a naval agent for Massachusetts, and on 
the 22nd of this month the Governor and 
Council of Safety appointed Elliot agent in 
all marine affairs to be transacted by Con- 
necticut in Massachusetts.^ 

During the Revolution the chief seaport 
of Connecticut was New London, then one 
of the largest and most important towns in 
New England. The most complete naval 
news of the time is to be found in the Con- 
necticut Gazette published at New London, 
and not in the Hartford Courant, or in the 
New Haven paper, the Connecticut Journal. 
New London was the naval station of the 
Connecticut fleet, the port where it was re- 
fitted and repaired. One of the most 
wealthy, influential, and pubHc-spirited 
merchants of New London was Nathaniel 
Shaw, jr. He was an ardent patriot and was 
on intimate terms with Washington and 
other Revolutionary leaders.^ The Govern- 



1. Records of State of Connecticut, 1.212, 
214, 418, 452. This is either Samuel Elliot, 
a Boston merchant, or Samuel Eliot, a most 
distinguished Boston merchant, a benefactor 
of Harvard college, and grandfather of the 
present President Eliot. — See New England 
Historical and Genealogical Register, XXHI 
(1869), 338-39. I find the agent's name spelled 
Elliot, Eliott, and Eliot. 

2. Better evidence of the social standing 
of the Shaw family in New London may not 
be needed than that afforded by the statis- 
tics contained in the following newspaper 
clipping: "A great wedding dance took place 



Navy of the American Revolution 363 

or and Council of Safety naturally turned 
to Shaw when naval duties were to be per- 
formed in New London. We have already 
seen that Shaw was present at a meeting of 
the Council of Safety in July, 1775, and was 
consulted on the initial naval project of the 
colony. From 1775 to 1779 the Governor 
and Council of Safety availed themselves of 
his services in fitting out their naval ves- 
sels. In July, 1776, they appointed him 
*' Agent for the Colony, for the purpose of 
naval supplies and for taking care of such 
sick seamen as may be sent on shore to his 
care."^ In October, 1778, the General As- 
sembly appointed Shaw Marine Agent for 
Connecticut and authorized him to equip 
the state vessels, to direct their cruises, and 
to receive and sell their prizes, in all, taking 
the advice of the Governor and Council of 
Safety from time to time.^ 

The Governor and Council of Safety 
showed an enterprising willingness to exper- 
iment in naval warfare, when in February, 
1776, they permitted David Bushnell to 

at New London at the house of Nathaniel 
Shaw, Esq., June 12, 1769, the day after the 
marriage of his son Daniel Shaw and Grace 
Coit; 92 gentlemen and ladies attended, and 
danced 92 jigs, 52 contra-dances, 45 minuets, 
and 17 horn-pipes, and retired 45 minutes 
past midnight." — F. M. Caulkins, History of 
Norwich, Connecticut, 332. 

1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
474. 

2. Records of State of Connecticut, II, 136. 



364 Navy of the American Revolution 

explain to them his machine for blowing up 
ships, and voted him £60 to complete his 
invention.^ Bushnell's ''American Turtle/' 
as his contrivance was called, anticipated 
modern inventions in submarine warfare. 
It consisted of a tortoise-shaped diving boat 
w^hich could be propelled under water. It 
contained a supply of air sufficient to last 
the operator a half-hour, and w^as guided by 
means of a compass made visible by phos- 
phorus. Upon reaching the doomed ves- 
sel a screw was driven into it by the operator. 
A magazine of pow^der was attached by a 
string to the screw. The casting of the mag- 
azine from the diving-boat set going a cer- 
tain clock-work which gave the operator 
time to get beyond the reach of danger before 
it ignited the powder. In 1777 a trial of the 
*' Turtle" against the British ship ''Eagle,'' 
84, in New York Harbor was unsuccessful. 
The operator succeeded in getting under 
the "Eagle," but was unable to drive the 
g;crew into her bottom. 

Connecticut did not establish state priva- 
teering. In May, 1776, the General Assem- 
bly authorized the Governor to fill out the 
blank privateering commissions which the 
President of Congress should send from time 

1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
233-36. I have followed the familiar ac- 
counts of this invention. Washington gave 
Jefferson an account of Bushnell's invention 
in September, 1785. — Ford, Writings of Wash- 
ington, X, 504-06. 



Navy of the American Revolution 365 

to time, and to deliver them to such persons 
as should execute the bond prescribed by 
Congress.^ A list of Connecticut privateers 
in which some vessels are counted two or 
more times has been made out. The totals 
of this list give 202 vessels, 1,609 guns, and 
7,754 men.2 In order to enlist her quota of 
troops for the Continental army, Connecti- 
cut in May, 1780, placed an embargo upon 
privateers.^ In May, 1776, the General As- 
sembly, in pursuance of the recommenda- 
tions of the Continental Congress relative to 
the establishment of admiralty courts by 
each state, vested the county courts of Con- 
necticut with the power to ' 'try, judge, and 
determine, by jury or otherwise, as in other 
cases, concerning all captures that have or 
shall be taken and brought into said respec- 
tive counties." The courts were to follow the 
rules of the civil law, the law of nations, and 
the resolutions of Congress. Appeals were 
allowed to the Continental Congress agree- 
able to its directions and resolves. Connect- 
icut was more liberal in granting appeals to 
Congress than Massachusetts, which state, 



1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
318-19. 

2. Records and Papers of New London 
County Historical Society, J, pt. 4, p. 32. 

3. State Archives, Acts of Connecticut, 
May, 1780. The laying of embargoes on pri- 
vateers for short periods in order to obtain 
men for different purposes was common dur- 
ing the Revolution. 



366 Xaz'x of the American Revolution 

it will be recalled, permitted such appeals 
only in cases of captures made by the ves- 
sels of the Continental navy.^ 

The reader may recollect that on August 
26, 1776, the Continental Congress recom- 
mended that each state should grant certain 
pensions to its citizens who should receive 
serious disabilities in the Continental naval 
service. In May, 1777, the Connecticut 
General Assembly granted such pensions; 
and in imitation of the resolutions of Con- 
gress it granted half-pay to all officers, sea- 
men, and marines in the Connecticut navy, 
who were wounded in action so as to be dis- 
abled from earning a livelihood ; and a frac- 
tion of half-pay for lesser disabilities.^ 

In October, 1777, the House of Represen- 
tatives passed a bill providing an elaborate 
list of rules and regulations relating to naval 
discipline, naval courts-martial, pay of offi- 
cers and seamen, and the sharing of prizes. 
The bill, however, was rejected by the Coun- 
cil.^ In April, 1779, when too late to be of 
much service, the General Assembly passed 
a statute creating a naval establishment, 
which was modelled on that of Congress. 
Two scales of wages were established, one for 
vessels under twenty guns, and the other 

1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
280-81. 

2. See Chapter IV, page 129; Records of 
State of Connecticut, I, 246-49. 

3. Connecticut Revolutionary Archives, 
VIII, 1777-1778. 



Navy of the American Revolution 367 

for vessels of twenty guns or upwards. 
Captains of the two classes received a 
monthly wage, respectively, of $48 and $60; 
lieutenants and masters, $24 and $30; and 
boatswains, $13 and $15. The wages for 
seamen and marines did not vary, being $8 
for seamen, and $6.67 for marines. The 
sharing of prizes among officers and seamen 
varied for the two classes. In general, the 
same offices were established as in the Con- 
tinental navy; there were, however, not so 
many of them. Following the regulations 
of Congress, the General Assembly gave the 
officers, seamen, and marines the whole of 
captured ships of war and privateers, and 
one-half of all other vessels.^ 

Besides the vessels already mentioned, 
there were, in the Connecticut navy, for a 
short time in 1777, the schooner ''Mifflin" 
and the sloop ''Schuyler;" and for an equally 
brief period in 1779, the sloop "Guilford."^ 



1. Records of State of Connecticut, II 
230-33. 

2. The vessels of the Connecticut navy 
with the approximate periods of their service 
were as follows: Brigantine "Minerva," 1775; 
schooner "Spy," 1775-1778; ship "Defence," 
1776-1779; ship "Oliver Cromwell," 1776- 
1779; galleys "Crane" and "Whiting," 1776; 
galley "Shark," 1776-1777; schooner "Mifflin," 
1777; sloop "Schuyler," 1777; and sloop 
"Guilford," 1779. The galley "New Defence," 
belonging to Branford, received arms, ammu- 
nition, and stores from the state. The sloop 
"Dolphin," a prize of the "Spy," was pur- 



368 Navy of the American Revolution 

By far the most important vessels in the 
navy were the ''OUver Cromwell", 18, "De- 
fence", 14, and ^'Spy", 6. The principal 
cruising ground of the Connecticut vessels 
was in and near Long Island Sound. This 
region was fairly alive with British craft of 
all sorts. Long Island was a nest of Tories, 
and New York was of course headquarters 
for the British in America. Connecticut, 
being convenient to both places, found 
much service for her navy in piotecting her 
coasts and in preventing illicit trade with 
the enemy. 

The cruises of the ''Oliver Cromwell," 
''Defence," and "Spy" were by no means 
confined to the waters near home. Several 
times they visited the ports of Massachu- 
setts. In the summer of 1777 the "Oliver 
Cromwell" cruised to the northward of the 
Azores, in the path of the homeward bound 
West Indiamen, where she captured and 
sent into Massachusetts the brigantine 
"Honor" and the "Weymouth" packet. 
In the spring of 1777 the "Defence" and a 
privateer met with success to the windward 
of the Lesser Antilles in capturing British 



chased in the fall of 1777, and sent to Phila- 
delphia for flour. The following captains were 
the chief officers of the navy: Giles Hall, 
Robert Niles, William Coit, Seth Harding, 
Timothy Parker, and Samuel Smedley. Coit 
had commanded the "Harrison" in Washing- 
ton's fleet, and Harding was given a commis- 
sion in the Continental navy. 



Navy of the American Revolution 369 

vessels bound for the West Indies. In the 
following spring the '^Oliver Cromwell" and 
the "Defence" were cruising in the same re- 
gion, where they captured the letter of 
marque ''Admiral Keppel/' eighteen six- 
pounders, the most valuable prize taken 
by the Connecticut navy. The ''Admiral 
Keppel" and her cargo sold in Boston for 
£22,321. In June and July, 1778, the "Oli- 
ver Cromwell" and the "Defence" refitted 
in Charleston, South Carolina. Towards 
the end of July the "Oliver Cromwell" 
sailed for Nantes with a load of indigo, 
which she expected to exchange for cloth- 
ing. Encountering a storm, this vessel was 
dismasted, and forced to return to Connect- 
icut. Some thirty prizes, most of which 
reached safe ports, were captured dur- 
ing the Revolution by the Connecticut 
navy.^ 

Upon the urgent and repeated solicita- 
tions of Washington, the three Connecticut 
galleys were sent by the Governor and Coun- 
cil of Safety in the summer of 1776 to New 
York to assist in the campaign on the Hud- 
son. The "Crane" and "Whiting," after 
giving a good account of themselves in an 
attack on two British vessels near Tarry- 
town, were lost to the enemy in the fall of 
1776. Th-e "Shark" probably met a similar 

1. Revolutionary Files of Connecticut Ga 
zette, Hartford Courant, and Connecticut 
Journal. 



370 Nary of the American Revolution 

fate.^ The ''Spy/' Captain Robert Niles, 
was one of several vessels which were se- 
lected to carry to France the news of the rat- 
ification by Congress of the French treaties 
of February, 1778. Captain Niles had the 
honor of reaching France first with his im- 
portant message and packet. On his re- 
turn voyage Niles and his vessel were cap- 
tured. In March, 1779, the ''Defence'' 
struck on a reef near Waterford, Connecti- 
cut, and sank.^ On June 5, after a severe 
fight to the southward of Sandy Hook, the 
"Oliver Cromwell" surrendered to a super- 
ior force.^ About July 1 the "Guilford," 8, 
which had been recently added to the navy, 
was taken by the enemy.^ With the cap- 
ture of this vessel, the navy of Connecticut 
came to an end. 

The w^arfare of "armed boats" partici- 
pated in by Connecticut deserves notice. 
During the Revolution much smuggling 
was carried on between men in Connect- 
icut and the British and Tories on Long Isl- 
and and at New York. The feeding of the 
British army at New York, the supplying 



1. Colonial Records of Connecticut, XV, 
481, 488; Records of State of Connecticut, I, 
85, 201; Hartford Courant, August 12, 1776; 
Connecticut in Revolution, 593-94. 

2. Records of State of Connecticut, II, 372; 
Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, II, 642, 
650. Hartford Courant, March 16, 1779. 

3. Hartford Courant, June 15, 1779. 

4. Records of State of Connecticut, II, 360. 



Navy of the American Revolution 371 

of the Tories on Long Island, and the de- 
mand for manufactured articles in Connect- 
icut, naturally made good markets. Po- 
litical law was in rivalry with economic law, 
and proved, in large part, powerless. In 
1778, 1779, and 1780, the Connecticut Gen- 
eral Assembly passed a number of stringent 
acts forbidding illicit commerce with the 
enemy. Many patriot refugees had fled to 
Connecticut from Long Island. Some of 
these men would obtain a license to return 
to their former homes for their property, 
and under its cover would engage in smug- 
gling. To prevent this abuse, the General 
Assembly in April, 1779, recalled the 
power to issue licenses, which it had previ- 
ously vested in the selectmen of towns.^ 

Since the trade had assumed alarming 
proportions, the General Assembly, in May, 
1780, authorized the Governor and Council 
of Safety to commission not more than 
twelve armed boats to suppress the trade.^ 
In October, Colonel William Ledyard, who 
was in command of the forts at New London 
and Groton, was ordered to provide three 
more whaleboats, besides the two which he 
already had obtained, to be used in the Sound 
against the smugglers ; and the Commandant 
of the French navy at Newport w^as asked to 
send two vessels to aid in the work.^ These 

1. Records of State of Connecticut, II, 222. 

2. State Archives, Acts of Connecticut, 
May, 1780. 

3. Ibid.. October. 1780- 



:i;j2. Navy of the American Revolution 

efforts of the state were in large part unavail- 
ing. Some of the boats commissioned to 
stop the trade became participants in it. 
'^On consideration of the Many Evils com- 
mitted by the armed Boats in this State 
commissioned to cruise on their own acct. 
for the pretended purpose of making cap- 
tures on the enemy and preventing illicit 
Trade and Traders/' the General Assembly 
on January 23, 1781, revoked all the com- 
missions which it had given to the armed 
boats. 

A more successful attempt to stamp out 
the abuse was that made by Norwich, in 
January, 1782. Certain associators agreed 
to hold no social or commercial intercourse 
with those persons detected in evading the 
laws. They provided boats which kept 
watch at suspected places; smuggled goods, 
wherever found, were seized and sold, and 
the proceeds were devoted to charitable 
purposes.^ 

1. History of Norwich, F. M, Caulkins, 398. 



CHAPTER XIII 

THE NAVY OF PENNSYLVANIA 

The two objects of Pennsylvania's naval 
enterprises were the defence of Philadelphia 
and the protection in Delaware river and 
bay of the outward and inward bound trade 
of the state. These two needs determined 
the form and size of her armed vessels and 
the character of their operations. Pennsyl- 
vania therefore adapted her fleet to shal- 
low waters. Only in a few instances did 
her armed vessels pass beyond the Capes of 
the Delaware into the Atlantic. 

On July 5, 1775, the Pennsylvania Com- 
mittee of Safety, the first Revolutionary 
executive of this state, visited ''Red Bank,'' 
situated a few miles below Philadelphia, 
near the mouth of the Schuylkill, for the pur- 
pose of deciding on the character of the de- 
fences which were to be made at this point 
on the river. On the 6th, having returned 
to Philadelphia, the Committee reported 
the results of its inspection; whereupon it 
came to its first naval resolution, that 
Robert White and Owen Biddle be a 
committee for the construction of boats and 



374 ^ai'y of the American Revolution 

machines for the defence of the River. ^ On 
July 8 it ordered John Wharton to immedi- 
ately build a ''Boat or Calevat/' 47 or 50 
feet keel, 13 feet broad, and 4 1-2 feet deep. 
By October, thirteen such galleys or armed 
boats had been built, at a cost of about 
£550 each. They were armed chiefly with 
18-pounders.^ During the late summer and 
the fall of 1775 the Committee of Safety at- 
tended to the numerous details of officering, 
manning, arming, and provisioning these 
galleys. It chose a captain and lieutenant 
for each of them; and on October 23 it ap- 
pointed Thomas Read commodore of the 
fleet. It organized a naval staff consisting 
of a muster master, a pay master, a surgeon, 
an assistant surgeon, a ship's husband, and 
a victualer. The distinguished scholar, 
Dr. Benjamin Rush, was made surgeon. 
The Committee of Safety prepared a form 
of commission for officers, a list of rules and 
regulations, general instructions for the 
captains, and general instructions for the 
commodore.^ 

The rules and regulations of the Pennsyl- 

1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X, 
Minutes of Committee of Safety, July 4, 6, 8, 
1775. 

2. PennsvlvaniaArchives2nd, I, 246; Wal- 
lace's William Bradford, 203. 

3. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X, 
Minutes of Committee of Safety, August 26, 
September 1, October 2, 12, 16, 23, Novem- 
ber 6, 1775. See also the Minutes of the Com- 
mittee of Safety for each day of this period. 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 375 

vania navy were concerned with little else 
than the establishing of a penal code. All 
penal offenses were to be tried by a court- 
martial, which, in capital cases, was to con- 
sist of fifteen naval officers; and in all other 
cases, of five officers, unless so many could 
not be assembled, when it might consist of 
three. A majority of the court was suffi- 
cient to convict, except in capital cases, 
where two-thirds were necessary. In re- 
turning a verdict, the officers of lowest rank 
voted first. Except in cases of mutiny, or of 
cowardice in time of action, all sentences of 
death needed the approval of the General 
Assembly, or, in its recess, of the Committee 
of Safety. Besides the death penalty, a 
court-martial could inflict no punishment 
other than ''degrading, cashiering, drum- 
ming out of the fleet, whipping, not exceed- 
ing thirty-nine lashes, fine, not exceeding 
two months' pay, and imprisonment, not 
exceeding one month." All fines were to 
go to the relief of those maimed and dis- 
abled in the service, or to the widows and 
families of such as should be killed. These 
rules, apparently, were not influenced by 
those of the Continental navy prepared by 
John Adams. ^ 

On November 7, 1775, the Committee of 
Safety decided to build a ship for the serv- 
ice on the Delaware, which would mount 



1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X, Min- 
utes of Committee of Safety, August 29, 1775. 



3/6 iVaz'3' of the American Revolution 

twenty 18-pounders; and it appointed six 
of its members, among whom were Robert 
Morris and John Nixon, a committee to 
build and arm the vessel. This committee 
estimated that £9,000 would be necessary 
to construct the ship. Later, owdng to the 
unfitness of the season for shipbuilding, 
it was authorized to purchase a vessel.^ By 
April, 1776, it had obtained and equipped 
the ship ''Montgomery,'' and Thomas 
Read had been given command of it. 
A number of small and unimportant 
craft were gradually added to the navy. 
On December 28, 1775, Captain John 
Hazelwood was appointed commander 
of ten fire-rafts. These rafts were thirty- 
five feet long and thirteen feet wide, were 
loaded with oil barrels, rosin casks, turpen- 
tine, brimstone, and various other inflam- 
mables, and were designed to float down 
stream and set fire to the enemy's ships 
through direct contact.^ An inventory of 
the navy, dated August 1, 1776, shows the 
following vessels and men: the ship ''Mont- 
gomery," 138 men; the floating battery 
"Arnold," 82 men; thirteen galleys, 35 men 
each; six guard boats, 12 men each; six 
small vessels, including fire-ships, a total 
of 27 men. The total number of officers, 

1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X, 
Minutes of Committee of Safety, November 7, 
November 10, 1775. 

2. Ibid., December 28, 1775; Pennsylvania 
Archives, 2nd, I, 248, note. 



Navy of the American Revolution 2^77 

seamen, and marines was 768; the Pennsyl- 
vania land forces at this time amounted to 
1,365 men.^ In August, 1776, the schooner 
''Delaware" and the brig ''Convention" 
were added; and in the fall the "Putnam" 
floating battery. 

I have found no mention of the uniform 
of the officers of the Pennsylvania navy. 
The uniform of the Pennsylvania marines 
was "a brown coat faced with green, letters 
1. P. B. on the buttons, and a cocked hat." 
In October, 1776, the flag for the naval ves- 
sels had not been provided. The following 
memorandum, taken from the minutes of 
the Pennsylvania Navy Board of May 29, 
1777, shows that flags had then been pro- 
cured: "An Order on William Webb to 
Elizabeth Ross, for fourteen pounds twelve 
shilHngs and two pence, for Making Ships' 
Colours etc."^ 

The Committee of Safety was assisted 
and directed in its naval work by committees 
of its own members, of which the principal 
ones are as follows: "ship committee," 

1. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, V, 3-5. The 
names of the thirteen galleys were as follows: 
"Bull Dog," "Burke," "Camden," "Chat- 
ham," "Congress," "Dickinson," "Experi- 
ment," "Effingham," "Franklin," "Hancock," 
"Ranger," "Warren," and "Washington." 
The "Delaware" and "Convention" were at 
times referred to as galleys. 

2. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, V, 46; 2nd, 
I, Minutes of Pennsylvania Navy Board, May 
29, 1777; 2nd. I, 251. 



2)7^ Navy of the American Revolution 

''armed boat committee/' ''committee for 
fitting out two of the armed boats/' "com- 
mittee for building two galleys for the Bay 
Service/' and "committee for fitting out 
four guard boats to cruise at Cape May." 
The Committee of Safety was composed of 
twenty-five members, any seyen of whom 
formed a quorum. Benjamin Franklin was 
its first president. Robert Morris was for 
a time its vice-president. In the absence 
of Franklin, Morris or John Nixon often pre- 
sided. On July 23, 1776, the Pennsylvania 
Convention appointed a Council of Safety 
to succeed the Committee of Safety, a suc- 
cession which involved merely a change of 
personnel and of name. From July 24, 
1776, until March 4, 1777, when the Supreme 
Executive Council, the executive under the 
first state constitution, assumed control, 
the administration of the Pennsylvania 
navy was vested in the Council of Safety. 

Much difficulty was experienced by the 
several Pennsylvania executives in finding 
suitable commodores for the fleet. The 
office on October 23, 1775, first fell to Thom- 
as Read. On January 13, 1776, Thomas 
Caldwell was made commodore; and on 
March 6, 1776, Read was formally placed 
second in command. Failing in health, 
Caldwell, on May 25, resigned, and on June 
15 the Committee of Safety appointed Sam- 
uel Davidson. This succession met with 
serious and continued opposition on the 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 379 

part of the officers of the navy. They de- 
clared that the appointment of Davidson 
violated the rule of promotion according to 
seniority in service ; and they made vigorous 
remonstrances, which received countenance 
and support from men of influence in Phila- 
delphia. So serious was the clamor and in- 
subordination, that the Committee of Safety 
was compelled to yield to the demands of a 
resolution of the Provincial Conference of 
Committees, and remove Davidson from the 
command of all the vessels except the shijD 
"Montgomery'^ and the ''Arnold" floating 
battery. The Committee, however, in an 
"Address to the Inhabitants of Pennsyl- 
vania," upheld the propriety and justice of 
their appointment; and it declared that by 
the support which the dissatisfied officers 
had received "mutiny was justified and 
abetted and disobedience triumphed over 
Authority."^ 

When the Council of Safety assumed con- 
trol of the navy on July 24, 1776, it found 
the spirit of dissatisfaction and insubordi- 
nation so strong among the naval officers 
that it removed Davidson from the navy; 
at the same time, however, it declared 
that the charges made against him 



1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X, 
Minutes of Comir.ittee of Safety, July 2, 1776; 
Proceedings of Provincial Conference of Com- 
mittees of Pennsylvania, June 23, June 24, 
1776. 



380 iVaz'3' of the American Revolution 

were frivolous.^ On September 2, 1776, 
the Council of Safety gave Samuel Mifflin 
an opportunity to decline the office of 
commodore. Thomas Seymour was named 
for the place on September 26, 1776. 
Early in 1777 Captain John Hazel wood, 
''Commander-in-Chief of the Fire Vessels, 
Boats and Rafts belonging to the State/' 
objected to being subject to the orders of 
Commodore Seymour, who was an old man, 
infirm, and incapacitated for his position. 
On September 6, 1777, when Philadelphia 
was threatened by the British, Seymour was 
discharged, and Hazelwood was appointed 
in his place.^ Hazelwood was the sixth 
commodore within less than two years. 

The Committee of Safety and the Council 
of Safety passed a number of resolutions fix- 
ing the naval pay. For a time the officers 
on board the ship "Montgomery" and the 
two floating batteries were generally paid 
larger wages than those on board the galleys. 
On February 22, 1777, the Council of Safety 
adopted a new pay-table, which gave the 
same salary to officers of the same rank, on 
whatever vessel employed. The monthly 
wages of the leading officers were as follows : 
commodore, $75; captains, $48; first lieu- 



1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, X, 
Minutes of Council of Safety, August 22, Aug- 
ust 27, 1776. 

2. Ibid. , XT , Minutes of Supreme Executive 
Council, September 6, 1777. 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 381 

tenants, $30; second lieutenants, $20; and 
surgeons, $48. Seamen were paid $12 a 
month. A bounty of $12 was now given to 
recruits.^ On June 25, 1777, the salary of 
the commodore was raised to $125 a month.^ 
On February 4, 1776, the Committee of 
Safety gave captors two-thirds of the pro- 
ceeds of the prizes taken on the Delaware 
river, and reserved the remaining one-third 
for the maintenance of disabled sailors and 
the widows and families of those who should 
be killed.^ 

Recognizing the navy's need of a perma- 
nent body of administrators, the Council of 
Safety on February 13, 1777, appointed a 
Navy Board of six members who were auth- 
orized to take under their care all the ves- 
sels of the navy. On February 19 four 
additional members were added.^ On 
March 13, 1777, the Supreme Executive 
Council, which on March 4 had become the 
executive of the state, reconstituted the 
naval board. It was now to consist of 
eleven members, any three of whom formed 
a quorum. It was given ''full power and 
authority -to do and perform all Matters and 



1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XI, 
Minutes of Council of Safety, February 22, 1777. 

2. Ibid., Minutes of Supreme Executive 
Council, June 25, 1777. 

3. Ibid. , X , Minutes of Committee of Safety, 
February 4, 1776. 

4. Ibid., XI, Minutes of Council of Safety, 
February 13, February 19, 1777. 



382 A^az'y of the American Revolution 

things Relating to the Navy of this State, 
subject nevertheless to the directions and 
examinations of the Council, from time to 
time, as we may judge expedient, and sav- 
ing to ourselves alwa3^s the power of ap- 
pointing officers/' William Bradford and 
Joseph Blewer, who each served for a time 
as chairman of the Board, were its most use- 
ful members. On the same day, March 13, 
the Supreme Executive Council constituted 
a Board of War.^ 

The work of the Navy Board consisted of 
a great variety of details relating to provis- 
ioning, arming, equipping, officering, and 
manning the numerous craft of the navy. 
Soon after entering into office it reported to 
the Council that it found the armed boats 
needing repairs and alterations, and that 
owing to the better wages paid to the seamen 
on board privateers there was a shameful 
deficiency in the armed boats' complement 
of men. The Board recommended the lay- 
ing of an embargo to prevent the sailing of 
private ships until the navy should be re- 



1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XI, 
Minutes of Supreme Executive Council, 
March 13, 1777. The members of the Navy 
Board as constituted by the Supreme Ex- 
ecutive Council were as follows: Andrew 
Caldwell, Joseph Blew^er, Joseph Marsh, 
Emanuel Eyre, Robert Ritchie, Paul Cox, 
Samuel Massey, William Bradford, Thomas 
Fitzsimmons, Samuel Morris, jr., and Thomas 
Barclay. 



Navy of the American Revolution 383 

cruited. It found that additional officers 
were needed.^ The Council immediately or- 
dered the Board to appoint the requisite 
number of warrant officers and to recom- 
mend proper commissioned officers. 

During 1777 the naval business of Penn- 
sylvania was large and comiDlicated. A 
list of stores issued to the navy for one 
month during the year contains the names 
of fifty-one vessels. Many of these are minor 
and unimportant craft, such as half-gal- 
leys, fire-ships, and accommodation sloops. 
A return of the Naval Department on Feb- 
ruary 1, 1777, shows 71 commissioned offic- 
ers, 2 staff officers, 123 non-commissioned 
officers, and 513 privates; total officers and 
men in the navy, 709. Many men who 
enlisted in the navy had little or no experi- 
ence at sea. The amount of the pay rolls for 
May, 1777, was £6,325.^ 

The salient event in the history of the 
Pennsylvania navy was the campaign on 
the Delaware river which followed the occu- 
pation of Philadelphia by the British in 
September, 1777. Before this time the 
navy had rendered miscellaneous services 
on the Delaware river and bay, which had 
been useful though not at all brilliant. Now 



1. Captains Nicholas Biddle, Thomas Read 
and Charles Alexander, and Lieutenant James 
Josiah resigned from the Pennsylvania navy 
to enter the Continental navy. 

2. Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, I, 416-24. 



384 Navy of the American Revolution 

and then some of the vessels were ordered 
down the river to protect incoming and out- 
going merchantmen, or to drive back the 
venturesome craft of the enemy. On May 
8, 1776, the galleys had a spirited engage- 
ment with the " Roebuck," 44, and the " Liv- 
erpool,'^ 28, in the Delaware river near the 
mouth of Christiana Creek. Little injury 
was done on either side. The British ves- 
sels returned to the Delaware Capes, and the 
Americans returned to their station at Mud 
Island, which was generally the headquar- 
ters for the state fleet. 

The reader is familiar with the military 
movements of Howe during the summer and 
fall of 1777; his irretrievable blunder in sail- 
ing from New York for Philadelphia, instead 
of cooperating with Burgoyne in the cam- 
paign on the Hudson; his landing with an 
army at the head of Elk in Maryland late in 
August; his march to Philadelphia; and 
after fighting the battle of Brandy wine, his 
entry into that city late in September. Upon 
occupying Philadelphia the British were 
forced to open a communication with the 
sea. This was for the time being prevented 
by the American defences at Mud Island 
and Red Bank just below the mouth of the 
Schuylkill. Here were situated Forts Mer- 
cer and Mifflin ; and here were stationed the 
vessels of the Pennsylvania and Continental 
navy under the command of Commodore 
Hazelwood. During October and Novem- 



Navy of the American Revolution 385 

ber, 1777, the Pennsylvania navy did its 
best fighting and rendered its most vahiable 
services. At this time the Pennsylvania 
Navy Board made its headquarters near the 
fleet on board the sloop '' Speedwell.'' 

On October 22 and 23, when the British 
fleet below the American defences on the 
Delaware attempted to pass them, Commo- 
dore Hazelwood with two floating batteries 
and twelve galleys forced them to retire, and 
succeeded in burning two of their vessels, 
the ''Augusta/' 64, and ''Meriin," 18, which 
ran aground. Congress voted Hazelwood 
an elegant sword in recognition of his merit. 
On the fall of Forts Mifflin and Mercer the 
American fleet was left without support. At 
a council of war held on board the sloop 
*' Speedwell" on November 19, it was decid- 
ed to pass Philadelphia with the fleet in the 
night and gain a point of safety to the north- 
ward of the city. Thirteen galleys, twelve 
armed boats, the brig ''Convention/' and a 
number of minor craft passed the city with- 
out receiving a shot. Before the ship 
"Montgomery," schooner "Delaware," float- 
ing batteries "Arnold" and "Putnam," 
and several Continental vessels could get 
i under sail, the wind died away; and thus 
i becalmed it was found necessary to set fire to 
them in order to prevent their capture.^ 



1. Wallace's William Bradford, 252-53, 
366-67; Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, VI, 21, 
47-50. 



386 Navy of the American Revolution 

On October 11, 1777, Commodore Hazel- 
wood reported a capture of fifty-eight pris- 
oners. About seventy men were killed or 
wounded in the different actions of the navy 
in the fall of 1777. Hazelwood wrote in 
October, 1777, that he had lost two hundred 
and fifty men through desertion owing to 
their cowardice and disaffection; and in 
February, 1778, that a great many men had 
run away since he had been in winter quar- 
ters.^ 

Several cases of the desertion of commis- 
sioned officers which took place during the 
campaign on the Delaware, were tried by 
courts-martial during the summer of 1778. 
First Lieutenant Samuel Lyon of the ''Dick- 
inson " galley was charged with deserting his 
vessel and going over to the enemy with seven 
men. Lyon pleaded guilty to the charge, 
and a court of fifteen fellow officers sen- 
tenced him ''to suffer Deathby being Shott.'^ 
On September 1 Lyon, together with Samuel 
Ford, a lieutenant lately attached to the 
"Effingham" galley who also had been con- 
victed of desertion, were executed on one 
of the guard boats in the Delaware. The 
first conviction for a capital crime in the 
Pennsylvania navy is said to have been 
made in the case of the boatswain of the 
"Montgomery," who was sentenced to death 
for desertion on June 25, 1778. On the trial 

1. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, V, 663,721; 
VI, 235; VII, 165. 



Navy of the American Revolution 387 

of John Lawrence for desertion, a gunner on 
board the '^ Dickinson" galley, the accused 
acknowledged that he ''took the Oath of 
Allegiance to the King of Great Britain, and 
received three and a half Guineas for his 
share of the Boat and Arms/' which he as- 
sisted in carrying to the enemy. The court 
sentenced him to ''suffer Death by being 
hung w^ith a Rope around his Neck till he is 
Dead, Dead, Dead/' Lawrence together 
with the lieutenant of the galley "Ranger" 
were reprieved on September 1, 1778.^ These 
desertions from the Pennsylvania navy are 
but one instance of many which prove that 
it w^as without esjprit de corps, and that its 
officers and men were often raw, undisci- 
plined, and insubordinate. Used to a free 
and easy life, they did not take kindly to the 
routine and discipline of the naval service. 
During the winter of 1777-1 778 when the 
British were in Philadelphia, the navy and 
Navy Board were some miles up the Dela- 
ware, A few members of the Board con- 
tinued to hold its sessions at Bordentown, 
Trenton, or other convenient points. The 
navy was disorganized at this time, and the 
work of the Board was naturally dull and 
disheartening. In January, 1778, William 
Bradford, its chairman, wrote from Trenton 
to President Wharton of the Supreme Ex- 
ecutive Council: "I am left here alone, none 



1. Pennsylvania Archives, 2n(i, I, 425-31. 



388 Aaz'y of the Aniericaii Revolution 

of the Board being with me. I am also 
tired of being here, had much rather be in 
action with the MiHtia/'^ 

In April, 1778, the Navy Board, acting 
reluctantly on Washington's advice who 
feared that the British would make a raid 
and capture the fleet, dismantled and sank 
all or nearly all of the state craft in the 
Delaware river. ^ On May 8 the British 
made their expected foray on the shipping 
to the northward of Philadelphia, and de- 
stroyed some forty-five vessels, among which 
were the two Continental frigates, ''Effing- 
ham" and "Washington," and probably a 
few of the minor craft belonging to the Penn- 
sylvania navy.^ 

As soon as the British received intelligence 
of the sailing of a French fieet under D'Est- 
aing for America, they prepared to evacuate 
Philadelphia. In anticipation of this event 
Hazel wood was in June raising and refitting; 
his fleet, and wishing that he had it in his^ 
"power to give the enemy a scouring before; 
they got out of the river." On July 19 he 
reported his vessels afloat and ready for use. 
Already the Supreme Executive Council had 
ordered the navy to be put into commission, 
and the brig "Convention" to make a cruiseti 
down the Bay. 

The Pennsylvania navy had cost the state 



1. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, VI, 204. 

2. Ibid., 332-33. 

3. Almon's Remembrancer, 1778, 148-50. 



I 



Navy of the Auierican Revolution 389 

at the rate of £100,000 a year.^ It had been 
serviceable in defending the Delaware, but 
it had in the end failed to hold it. Always 
hampered by a lack of seamen, of naval sup- 
plies, and of an armed force comparable to 
that of the enemy, the Navy Board found 
the greatest difficulty in enforcing the orders 
of the Council. It was naturally blamed 
for a part of the inactivity and the misfor- 
tunes of the fleet. Since the British had 
abandoned Philadelphia, and a strong 
French fleet was in American waters, the 
need for a naval defence of the Delaware 
seemed more remote than it did in the first 
years of the Revolution. These considera- 
tions moved the Supreme Executive Coun- 
cil on August 14, 1778, to recommend to the 
General Assembly the dismissal of the Navy 
Board, and all the officers and men of the 
navy, except those that were necessary toman 
two or three galleys, two or three guard boats, 
and the brig '' Convention. '^ The General 
Assembly at once agreed to the recommend- 
ation. Finally, on Friday, December 11, 
the following vessels were sold at the "Cof- 
fee House" in Philadelphia: ''Ten galleys. 
Nine armed Boats, the Brig 'Convention,' 
the sloops 'Speedwell,' 'Sally,' 'Industry,' 
and 'Black Duck;' and the schooner 
'Lydia."'2 



1. Scharf and Westcott, History of Phila- 
delphia, I, 300. 

2. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XI, 



L 



■390 Naz'y of the American Revolution 

In March, 1779, there remained in the 
navy six small craft, namely, the galleys 
'^Franklin/' ''Hancock,^' and 'Chatham/' 
and the armed boats, '*Lion,'^ ''Fame" and 
''Viper;" and there were still in commission 
five captains, six lieutenants, and one hun- 
dred and eighteen men.^ This little fleet 
was quite insufficient to protect the com- 
merce of the state. In March, 1779, the 
Supreme Executive Council, in response to 
a petition from the merchants of Philadelphia 
praying for the protection of their trade, 
purchased the ship "General Greene," at a 
cost of £53,000; and placed it in charge of 
two agents, who were to fit it for sea, and re- 
ceive and dispose of its prizes. Part of the 
money which was used in fitting the "Gen- 
eral Greene," 14, was raised by private sub- 
scription. During the summer and fall of 
1779 the new ship, under the command of 
Captain James Montgomery, cruised along 
the Atlantic coast between Sandy Hook and 
the Virginia Capes either alone, in company 
with the Continental frigates, "Boston," 
"Deane," and Confederac}^," or in company 
with the well-known Philadelphia privateer, 

Minutes of Supreme Executive Council, Au-; 
gust 14, August 16, December 9, 1778. The 
capture of the sloop "Active" by the "Con- 
vention" in the fall of 1778, gave rise to the 
most celebrated prize case of the Revolution. 
— Jameson, Essavs in Constitutional History 
of United States, "17-21. 

1. Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, I, 255. 



Navy of the American Revolution 391 

"Holker." The "General Greene'' was 
quite fortunate, as she sent into Philadel- 
phia six prizes. In the spring before a full 
complement of men could be enlisted, Presi- 
dent Reed of the Supreme Executive Coun- 
cil was compelled to lay an embargo on 
privateers. Her crew were a mutinous rab- 
ble. In June Captain Montgomery wrote 
that he had arrived at New Castle with a 
Great number of Prisoners on board and a 
Great Part of my own Crew Such Villous 
that they would be glad of an opportunity 
to take the Ship from me. Som of the Ring- 
leaders I have sent up in Irons." On Oc- 
tober 27 the Council ordered the ''General 
Greene" to be sold, as this was more econ- 
omical than laying her up for the winter. 
Her sale, much below her real value, arous- 
ed suspicions of collusion and corruption.^ 

Naval legislation in Pennsylvania was not 
extensive. In 1775, 1776, and 1777 almost 
all naval rules and provisions were estab- 
lished by executive decrees. Before the 
middle of January, 1776, the Committee of 
Safety had established courts for the trying 
of prize cases. ^ It permitted appeals from 
the state prize courts to Congress. On Sep- 
tember 9, 1778, however, the General As- 

1. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st, VII, 320, 
476; Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XI, 
724, 750; XII, 150; Scharf and Westcott, His- 
tory of Philadelphia, I, 403. 

2. J. F. Jameson, Essays in Constitutional 
History of United States, 9. 



392 Xaz'y of the American Revolution 



sembly established a Court of Admiralty. A 
law passed in 1780 provided that a judge of 
admiralty should be appointed and com- 
missioned for seven years by the Supreme 
Executive Council.^ On September 17, 

1777, an act was passed for the relief of of- 
ficers, seamen and marines, who, being in 
the service of the United States and resi- 
dents of Pennsylvania, should be disabled 
from earning a livelihood. In all probability 
this was passed in accordance with the rec- 
ommendations of the Continental Congress 
of August 26, 1776. On March 1, 1780, the 
General Assembly granted officers, seamen, 
and marines in the Pennsylvania navy, who 
were in actual service on March 13, 1779, 
and who should continue therein until the^ 
end of the war, half-pay for life.^ 

It is believed that Pennsylvania did not 
establish state privateering. Her execu- 
tives in commissioning privateers in all 
probability followed the regulations of Con- 
gress. The Pennsylvania Archives contain 
a list of 448 privateering commissions issued 
for the years from 1776 to 1782. Most of the 
privateers were small vessels, mounting six 
to twelve cannon, and carrying twenty-five 
to fifty men. Out of the 448 commissions, 
only 14 commissions were for vessels mount- 
ing twenty or more guns. In 1779 Penn- 

1. Laws of Pennsylvania, September 9, 

1778, March 8, 1780. 

2. Ibid., September 17, 1777; March 1, 
1780. 



Navy of the American Revolution 393 

sylvania issued commissions for one hun- 
dred different vessels.^ 

The sj^ring of 1782 was marked by a re- 
newal in naval enterprise similar to that in 
the spring of 1779. Armed ships, refugee 
boats, and picaroon privateers fitted out at 
New York, had been greatly distressing the 
shipping and trade of Philadelphia. Within 
eight months the British frigate ''Medea'' 
had taken nine Philadelphia privateers; the 
whale-boat "Trimmer" from New York had 
been very destructive to the shipping on the 
Delaware; and the British naval ship "Gen- 
eral Monk," formerly the American priva- 
teer "Washington/' was inflicting serious 
losses on Pennsylvania's commerce.^ The 
merchants and traders of Philadelphia now 
appealed by petition to the General Assem- 
bly for protection. Accordingly, on April 
9, that body appointed three commissioners 
to procure and equip a naval armament for 
the defence of Delaware river and bay. The 
commissioners were authorized to borrow 
£50,000, which was to be repaid from certain 
old tonnage and impost duties, and from a 
new impost on certain specified articles. 
The act also provided for a distribution of 
the proceeds of prizes. Thip act is signifi- 
cant in its being the first instance where the 
General Assembly authorized a naval in- 
crease and appointed a committee to take 

r Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, 1,388-402. 

2. Scharf and Westcott, History of Phila- 
delphia, I, 421-22. 



394 Nd'vy of the Auierican Revolution 

charge of naval vessels. It met with con- 
siderable disfavor. The Supreme Executive 
Council informed the General Assembly that 
it considered the appointment of commis- 
sioners and the conferring upon them of full 
administrative powers unconstitutional and 
an encroachment of the legislative on the 
adntinistrative body.^ 

Anticipating the act of the legislature, the ; 
merchants of Philadelphia had fitted outi 
the ship ''Hyder Ally/' 18, and had ap- 
pointed Lieutenant Joshua Barney of the 
Continental navy to command her. Pro- 
ceeding down the Bay, Barney on April 8 
made his memorable capture of the '' Gen- 
eral Monk," 18, Captain Josias Rogers. BothI 
the "Hyder Ally" and the ''General Monk"^ 
were now taken into the service of the state.: 
The ''General Monk,'' which was renamed 
the "Washington," was in May, 1782,.: 
loaned to Robert Morris, the Continental 
Agent of Marine, who sent her on a commer- 
cial errand to the Westlndies. On the return 
of the "Washington." Morris purchased 
her for the ser^nce of Congress. The " Hydei 
Ally" under different commanders cruised 
for the rest of the year with little suc- 
cess. In December the commissioners ob- 

1. Laws of Pennsylvania, April 9, April 15 
1782; Mary Barney, Memoirs of Commodon 
Barney, 303-04. Pennsylvania Archives, 1st 
IX, 531-32. The three Commissioners wen 
John Patton, Francis Gurney, and Willian 
Allibone,. 



Navy of the American Revolution 395 

tained permission from the Supreme Exec- 
utive Council to sell her, and build a vessel 
of more suitable construction for the defence 
of the Delaware, for which purpose they 
were already equipping an armed schooner. 
When the ^' Hyder Ally " was offered for sale, 
the commissioners bid her in for the state, 
as the bidders refused to give her full value. ^ 
The establishment of officers and seamen 
on board the '' Hyder Ally " and the " Wash- 
ington" was a new one. On February 13, 
1781, the officers and seamen of the first 
establishment were all discharged, except 
Captain Boys and certain disabled seamen; 
and on December 20 Boys was dismissed, 
since the service in which he was engaged was 
at an end.^ When peace was declared in 
the spring of 1783, a few men were prob- 
ably in naval employ under the new estab- 
lishment. That the state still owned a few 
small vessels is certain. On April 10, 1783, 
the Supreme Executive Council endorsed a 
letter from the commissioners saying ''that 
as no doubt appears to remain that Hostili- 
ties are ceased, we conceive it our Duty to 
' request your permission to dispose of the 
Armed vessels under our direction belonging 
to the State, in order to enable us to close 
\ our accounts with the Public."^ 

1. Colonial Records of Pennsylvania, XIII, 
Minutes of Supreme Executive Council, De- 
r cember 6, 1782. 

ii 2. Pennsylvania Archives, 2nd, I, 256. 
j 3. Ibid., 1st, X, 26. 



CHAPTER XIV 

THE NAVY OF VIRGINIA 

In July, 1775, Virginia began to raise and 
officer an army of more than one thousand 
men. By fall Lord Dunmore, the Provin- 
cial Governor of Virginia, who in June had 
retreated to His Majesty's ship 'Towey" at 
Yorktown, had collected a small flotilla^ 
and had begun a series of desultory attacks 
upon the river banks of Virginia. On Octo 
ber 25 he was repulsed at Hampton; on De 
cember 9 he was beaten by the Virginia pa- 
triots at Great Ridge; and on January 1 he 
burned Norfolk. His movements excited 
so much alarm that the leading patriot fam- 
ilies on the James, York, Rappahannock, 
and Potomac rivers retreated inland fo: 
safety. In order to prevent the depreda 
tions of Lord Dunmore, and to provide ef- 
fectually for the general defence of the state, 
the Virginia Provincial Convention in D 
cember authorized the Committee of Safet; 
of the state "to provide from time to time' 
such and so many armed vessels as they 
may judge necessary for the protection of 
the several rivers in this colony, in the best 



i 



IN, 

A'az'y of the American Revolution 397 

manner the circumstances of the country 
will admit/' The Committee of Safety was 
further directed to raise a sufficient number 
of officers, sailors, and marines; and settle 
their pay, which was not to exceed certain 
specified rates. The maximum wage 
of ''the chief commander of the whole as 
commodore" was fixed at fifteen shillings a 
day.i 

Between December, 1775, and July, 1776, 
the Committee of Safety procured and es- 
tablished a small navy. On April 1 it fixed 
the naval pay, generally at the maximum 
rates permitted. Captains in the navy 
were to receive a daily wage of 8s. ; captains 
of marines, 6s.; midshipmen, 3s.; marines, 
Is., 6d. The Committee resolved that two 
years ought to be a maximum period of serv- 
ice. It appointed a number of the most 
prominent officers in the Virginia navy, 
among whom were Captains James Barron, 
Richard Barron, Richard Taylor, Thomas 
Lilly, and Edward Travis. It fixed the rel- 
ative rank between army and navy officers. 
It purchased the boats ''Liberty" and "Pa- 
triot," the brigs "Liberty" and "Adven- 
ture," and the schooner "Adventure." It 
contracted for the construction of a num- 
ber of galleys on the different rivers of the 
state.^ 



1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 83. 

2. Calendar of Virginia State Papers, VIII, 
75-240, Journal of Committee of Safety of 



398 Navy of the American Revolution 

George Mason and John Dalton were ap- 
pointed a committee to build two row-gal- 
leys, and buy three cutters for the defence of 
the Potomac. In April, 1776, Mason wrote 
that the galleys were well under way, and 
that three small vessels had been purchased, 
of which the largest was a fine stout craft of 
about 110 tons burden, mounting fourteen 
8's and 4's, carrying ninety-six men, and 
named the ''American Congress/' A com- 
pany of marines for this vessel, he said, 
were being exercised in the use of the great 
guns.^ The Committee of Safety chose a 
''Lieutenant of Marines in the Potomac river 
Department." 

The Provincial Convention of Virginia, 
which met at Williamsburg on May 6, 1776, 
being convinced that the naval prepara- 
tions would be conducted more expedi- 
tiously and successfully if proper persons 
were appointed to superintend and di- 
rect the same, chose a Board of Naval Com- 
missioners, consisting of five persons.^ The 

Virginia, February 7 to July 5, 1776. Vir- 
ginia had a class of vessels which she referred 
to as "armed boats." They were smart craft, 
and appear to have been schooner-rigged. 

1. Miss Rowland's George Mason, I, 214, 
218 

2." Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 149-51. 
The Provincial Convention which met May 
6, 1776, adopted a Constitution which provided 
for a Legislature of two houses, and an Execu- 
tive consisting of a Governor and a Privy 
Council of eight members. 



Navy of the American Revolution 399 

Board was authorized to appoint a clerk 
and assistants, and to elect from their mem- 
bership a First Commissioner of the Navy — 
the title of a well-known officer in the Eng- 
lish naval service. No member of the 
Board could sit in the legislature or hold a 
military office. Each Commissioner was to 
receive twenty shillings a day, when em- 
ployed. On the depreciation of the cur- 
rency this was doubled.^ A majority of the 
Board constituted a quorum. Thomas 
Whiting served as First Commissioner of 
the Board throughout its existence. 

In general, the business of the Navy 
Board was *'to superintend and direct all 
matters and things to the navy relating." 
It had charge of the building, purchase, fit- 
ting, arming, provisioning, and repairing of 
all armed vessels and transports. It had 
charge of the shipyards and the public rope- 
walk. In case of vacancies in the navy or 
marines it recommended officers to the Gov- 
ernor and Council. It could suspend an of- 
ficer for neglect of duty or for misbehavior. 
It was to keep itself informed on the state 
of the navy through reports from the na- 
val officers. It was authorized to draw 
warrants on the treasury for money ex- 
pended in the naval department, and to 
audit the naval accounts. 

The Navy Board had charge of naval af- 

1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 521-22' 
October session of General Assembly in 1778* 



400 A^az'y of the American Revolution 

fairs in Virginia for three years, from the 
summer of 1776 until the summer of 1779. 
During 1776 and 1777 vessels were built on 
the Eastern Shore of Virginia, on the Po- 
^ tomac, Rappahannock, Mattapony, Chick- 
ahominy, and James rivers, and at Ports- 
mouth, Gosport, and South Quay. After 
1777 vessels were chiefly built at the Chick- 
ahominy and Gosport shipyards. No other 
state owned so much land, property, and 
manufactories, devoted to naval purposes, 
as Virginia. In April, 1777, the Navy 
Board purchased 115 acres of land, for £595, 
on the Chickahominy, twelve miles from its 
confluence with the James. ^ On this site 
was located the Chickahominy shipyard. 
Virginia's ships found here a safer retreat 
than at Gosport, which lay convenient for 
the enemy's ships. It is said that before 
the Revolution the British had established 
a marine yard at Gosport, and named it for 
Gosport, England, where many supplies for 
the Royal Navy were manufactured. In 
some way Virginia came into possession of 
the shipyard at this place.^ Two ships were 
built for the defence of Ocracoke Inlet, the 
chief entrance to Albemarle Sound, at 
South Quay, on the Blackwater, a few miles 
north of the North Carolina line. 

1. Southern Literary Messenger, 1857, 14. 
The references to this magazine refer to a series 
of valuable articles entitled "The Virginia 
Navy of the Revolution. " 

2. E. P. Lull, History of U. S. Navy Yard, 



Navy of the American Revolution 401 

At Warwick, on the James, a few miles 
below Richmond, the state built and op- 
erated a rope-walk. The state owned a 
manufactory of sail-duck and a foundry. 
In July, 1776, four naval magazines were 
established, one each for the James, York, 
Rappahannock, and Potomac rivers. For 
each magazine one or two agents were ap- 
pointed to collect and issue provisions, 
ships' supplies, and naval stores.^ For the 
location of the magazine on the Potomac 
the General Assembly authorized the Navy 
Board to purchase an acre of land at the 
head of "Potomack Creek."^ In January, 
1777, the Navy Board appointed James 
Maxwell, Naval Agent, to superintend the 
shipyards, and the building, rigging, equip- 
ping, and repairing of the naval vessels. Ke 
was to follow the instructions of the Board, 
and keep it informed on the state of the 
navy.^ Maxwell's annual salary was £300, 
payable quarterly. He lived at the Chick- 
ahominy shipyard. 

Virginia had a naval staff consisting of 
pay masters, muster masters, surgeons, and 
chaplains. The captains and recruiting of- 



at Gosport, Virginia, 8-11; Hening, Statutes 
of Virginia, XI, 407. 

1. Journals of Virginia Navy Board, Vir- 
ginia State Archives, June 25, June 26, 1776. 

2. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 235- 
36. 

3. Journals of Virginia Navv Board, Janu- 
ary 7, 1777. 



402 N'avy of the American Revolution 

ficers enlisted seamen. Their task was ren- 
dered difficult, not so much because of 
the superior attractions of privateering, as 
in New England, as because of the small 
number of seamen resident in the state. 
The first commodore of the Virginia navy- 
was John Henry Boucher. He was serving 
as lieutenant in the Maryland navy, when, 
in March, 1776, Virginia called him to the 
command of her Potomac fleet, and soon 
promoted him to the head of her navy.^ He 
served as commodore for only a few months, 
resigning in November, 1776. Walter 
Brooke was commodore from April, 1777, 
until September, 1778. Brooke's successor, 
James Barron, was not appointed until 
July, 1780; he served until the end of the 
war. The commodore of the navy made 
his headquarters regularly at or about 
Hampton, and superintended the armed 
vessels in that part of the state.^ 

In Virginia, as in the other states and in 
the Continental Congress, naval enthusiasm 
and interest was at its height in 1776. In 
the fall the Navy Board contracted for the 
building of twenty-four small transports.* 
The General Assembly in its October ses- 
sion authorized the Navy Board to con- 

1. Maryland Archives, XI, 293-94. 

2. Journals of Virginia Navy Board; State 
Navy Papers, I ; Southern Literary Messenger, 
1857, 3. 

3. Journal of Virginia Navy Board, Sep- 
tember, October, 1776. 



I 



Navy of the American Revolution 403 

struct two frigates of thirty-two guns each, 
and four large galleys, adapted ''for river 
or sea service." For manning these galleys 
and those already building, the Navy Board 
was empowered to raise thirteen hundred 
men, exclusive of officers, to serve three 
years from March 3, 1777. It was to rec- 
ommend proper officers to the Governor and 
Council. Having been commissioned by 
the Governor, the officers were to enlist the 
crews for their respective galleys. Since to 
secure a sufficient number of experienced 
seamen would be impossible, it was provided 
that each crew should consist of three classes 
of men: able seamen, at a daily wage of 3s. ; 
ordinary seamen, at 2s. ; and common lands- 
men, at Is., 6d. As the men in the second 
and third classes became proficient, they 
were to be promoted. Every recruit was 
given a bounty of $20.^ 

The Provincial Convention, in its Decem- 
ber session in 1775, erected a Court of Ad- 
miralty, consisting of three judges, to en- 
force the Continental Association against 
trading with England. In its May session 
in 1776, it gave this court jurisdiction over 
all captures of the enemy's vessels. The 
General Assembly, at its October session in 
1776, superseded all previous admiralty legis- 

l7 Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 196-97. 
In August, 1776, the Navy Board drew up a 
list of naval rules which were endorsed by the 
Governor and Council. — Journals of Virginia 
Navy Board, August 2, 1776. 



404 Navy of the American Revolution 

lation by an ''Act for Establishing a Court 
of Admiralty." Such court was to consist 
of three judges, elected by joint ballot of 
the two houses of the General Assembly. 
The judges were to hold their offices ''for so 
long time as they shall demean themselves 
well therein." The court, which was to be 
held at some place to be fixed by the Gen- 
eral Assembly, was to have cognizance of 
"all causes heretofore of admiralty juris- 
diction in this country." Its proceedings 
and decisions were to be governed by the 
regulations of the Continental Congress, the 
acts of the General Assembly of Virginia, the 
English statutes prior to the fourth year of 
the reign of James , and by the laws of Oleron 
and the Rhodian and Imperial laws, so far 
as they have been heretofore observed in 
the English courts of admiralty. In cases 
which related to captures from a public 
enemy with whom the United States should 
be at war, and in which a conffict should 
arise between the regulations of Congress 
and the acts of the General Assembly, the 
regulations of Congress should take prece- 
dence; in all other cases of conffict, the acts 
of Virginia were to prevail. This provision 
is of particular interest. It is one of the 
first instances in which a state recognized 
the superiority of federal law when in con- 
ffict with state law. Virginia was liberal 
in granting appeals to Congress, as she per- 



Navy of the American Revolution 405 

mitted them in all cases of the capture of 
the enemy's vessels.^ 

The Admiralty Court of Virginia tried few 
prize cases. Governor Thomas Jefferson 
in writing to the President of Congress in 
June, 1779, no doubt understates the truth 
when he says that "a British prize would 
be a more rare phenomenon here than a 
comet, because one has been seen, but the 
other never was." His state, he said, had 
long suffered from a lack of blank letters of 
marque, and he wished fifty to be sent to 
him.^ Virginia did not establish state pri- 
vateering, but followed the regulations of 
(Congress on the subject. Because of the 
lack of seamen and the continual presence 
of the enemy's vessels at the mouths of the 
Virginia rivers, the privateering interest 
was not important in this state. 

The Navy Board superintended bath the 
trading and armed vessels of the state un- 
til April, 1777, when the trading vessels 
were placed in charge of William Aylett.^ 
Writers on the Virginia navy have not, as a 
rule, distinguished one class of vessels from 
the other, nor is it always easy to do so. 
During 1776 seven vessels were employed 



1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, IX, 103, 
131-32, 202-06. 

2. Ford, Writings of Thomas Jefferson, II, 
241-43. 

3. Journals of Virginia Navy Board, April 
8. 1777. 



4o6 Navy of the American Revolution 

chiefly in commerce.^ In the fall, most of 
them were ordered to the West Indies with 
cargoes of flour and tobacco; one, the brig 
''Adventure," was directed to proceed to 
Dunkirk, France. The armed fleet for 1776 
consisted of sixteen small craft adapted 
chiefly for service in the rivers of Virginia 
and in Chesapeake Bay.^ In 1777 the gal- 
leys ''Accomac" and ''Diligence'^ were built 
and stationed on the Eastern Shore ; and the 
ships ''Caswell" and "Washington" were 
built at South Quay on the Blackwater, for 
the defence of Ocracoke Inlet, which Vir- 
ginia was undertaking jointly with North 
Carolina. Besides these four vessels, two 
brigs, one armed boat, and the ships "Glou- 
cester," "Protector," "Dragon," and "Tar- 
tar," were this year added to the navy. In 
1778 an armed boat and the ships "Tem- 

1. These vessels were the brig "Adven- 
ture;" the schooners "Hornet," "Peace and 
Plenty," "Revenge," and "Speedwell;" the 
sloop "Agatha;" and the armed boat "Molly." 
The lists of vessels here given were compiled 
from the Virginia naval archives. 

2. These vessels were the galleys "Henry," 
"Hero," "Lewis," "Manly," "Norfolk Re- 
venge," "Page," and "Safeguard;" the brigs 
"Liberty," "Mosquito," "Northampton," and 
"Raleigh;" the schooners "Liberty" and "Ad- 
venture;" the sloop "Scorpion;" and the armed 
boats "Liberty" and "Patriot." The schooner 
"Liberty" was taken into the trading fleet as 
the "Hornet. " It is believed that this list does 
not contain the vessels in Mason's Potomac 
fleet. 



I 



Navy of the American Revolution 407 

pest" and 'Thetis" were built; and in 1779 
two armed boats, the brig "Jefferson" and 
the ship ''Virginia," were added.^ 

This fleet is formidable only in its enumer- 
ation. It was poorly armed, incompletely 
manned, and in almost every respect ill 
fitted for service. But few of its vessels 
went beyond the Chesapeake Bay. It 
showed most activity during 1776 and the 
spring of 1777. From 1775 until 1779 fif- 
teen small prizes were captured. In May, 
1776, Captain Taylor seized four small mer- 
chantmen; in June, one of the Barrons 
brought up to Jamestown the transport 
"Oxford," with 220 Highlanders on board; 
in the spring of 1777 the "Mosquito," Cap- 
tain Harris, carried into St. Pierre the ship 
"Noble," valued at 75,000 livres; and a few 
months earlier the brig "Liberty" captured 
the ship "Jane," whose cargo of West India 
goods was valued at £6,000. These were 
the most fortunate captures made by the 
Virginia navy.^ 



1 The names of the vessels not mentioned 
in the text, which were added during 1777, 
1778, and 1779 were the brigs "Greyhound" 
and "Hampton" and the armed boats "Nichol- 
son," "Experiment," "Fly," and "Dolphin." 
The names of several other vessels which were 
probably used in trade, occur during this peri- 
od. Some of the ships are at times referred 
to as galleys. 

2. Files of Virginia Gazette; Journals of 
Virginia Convention, May 8, 1776; Virginia 



4o8 A^avy of the American Revolution 

Virginia's naval craft met with the usual 
misfortunes. During the first half of 1777 
His Majesty's ship ' 'Ariadne" captured the 
''Mosquito." About the same time the 
frigate 'Thcenix" took the ''Raleigh." The 
British made two raids into Virginia which 
were destructive both to the shipping of the 
state and to private individuals. The first 
was ordered by Clinton in the spring of 
1779; the troops were under the command 
of Matthews and Collier. At the Gosport 
shipyard the}^ destroyed five uncompleted 
vessels, three of which were frigates, besides 
a large quantity of masts, yards, timber, 
plank, iron, and other ships' stores. The 
shipyards on the Nansemond were looted; 
and twenty-two vessels with a considerable 
quantity of powder w^ere taken or destroyed 
on the "South Branch of the navy." Suf- 
folk was burned, and upwards of two thou- 
sand barrels of Continental pork and fifteen 
hundred barrels of flour were destroyed. In 
all one hundred and thirty vessels were 
burned.^ The raid of Arnold and Phillips 
will be considered later. 

The General Assembly at its May session 
in 1779 discontinued the Navy Board, and 

Historical Register I, 77; Calendar of Virginia 
State Papers, III, 365. 

1. Almon's Remembrancer, 1779, 289-95, 
account given by British officers; Records of 
State of North Carolina, XIV, 85-86, 94-95. 
Some of the vessels destroyed at Gosport prob- 
ably belonged to Congress, 



A'az'y of the American Revolution 409 

vested its strictly naval duties with the 
newly created Board of War, consisting of 
five members. The Board of War was em- 
powered to appoint a Naval Commissioner. 
A Board of Trade was now given charge of 
the trading vessels of the state/ and of the 
state manufactories of military supplies.^ 

The General Assembly in its May session, 
1780, '^for the purpose of introducing oecon- 
omy into all the various departments of 
government, and for conducting the publick 
business with the greatest expedition/' abol- 
ished the Boards of War and Trade, and 
authorized the Governor to appoint a Com- 
missioner of War, a Commercial Agent, and 
coordinate with these two, a Commissioner 
of the Navy. This act is the outgrow^th of 
the same movement for economy and effi- 
ciency in administration, w^hich resulted in 
the establishment in January and Febru- 
ary, 1781, of the single-headed executive 
departments of the Continental Congress. 
The salary of the Commissioner of the Navy 
w^as fixed at thirty thousand pounds of to- 
bacco a year, ancl that of his clerk at ten 
thousand pounds.^ The Commissioner was 
to be under the "controul and direction of 
the governour and council." Governor 
Jefferson appointed Jam.es Maxw^ell, the 
naval agent under the Navy Board, Com- 
missioner of the Navy. 

1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, X, 15- 
18 123 

2. IlDid.. 278, 291-92. 



410 Navy of the American Revolution 

The General Assembly in the May session 
of 1779, as an inducement to enlistment, 
granted seamen and marines additional 
bounties and pensions. Recruits entering 
for the rest of the war were now to receive 
$750 and one hundred acres of land. They 
were to be furnished upon enlistment, and 
once a year thereafterwards, with a com- 
plete suit of clothes. Naval officers were en- 
titled to a "grant of the like quantity of 
lands as is allowed to officers of the same 
rank in the Virginia regiments on continen- 
tal establishment.'^ Disabled sailors and 
the widows of the slain were entitled to im- 
mediate relief, and an annual pension. At 
the October session of this year, moved by 
the need for money and the impossibility 
of fitting out the whole fleet, the General 
Assembly ordered the governor to sell nine 
of the armed vessels, and to equip and man 
the remaining six with all diligence. For 
some reason the governor did not carry out 
the order. There was probably little mar- 
ket for the vessels.^ 

The years 1780 and 1781 were marked by 
a renewed naval activity in Virginia. It 
is recalled that the theater of war had now 
shifted to the Southern states. Savannah 
was in the hands of the enemy. Charleston 
surrendered in May, 1780. By the fall of that 
year the lowlands of the states to the south 
of Virginia were generally in the possession 

~. Hening, IX, 537; X, 23-24, 217. 



Navy of the American Revolution 411 

of the British. Apparently Virginia would 
be the next to feel the rough hand of the 
conquering enemy. British privateers and 
naval craft lay off the mouths of the Vir- 
ginia rivers, and captured all her vessels that 
ventured towards the Bay or the sea. Early 
in 1780 it was apprehended that the enemy 
meditated an invasion of the coasts of the 
state. 

When the General Assembly came to- 
gether in May, 1780, it at once took meas- 
ures for the protection of the coasts. It 
passed ''an act for putting the eastern fron- 
tier of this commonwealth into a posture 
of defence.^' This act, after providing for 
calling out the militia in the seaport coun- 
ties, ordered the Governor and Council to di- 
rect the Commissioner of the Navy to imme- 
diately make ready for service in the Bay 
and on the seacoast the ships ''Thetis,'' 
"Tempest," and "Dragon,'' the brig "Jeffer- 
son," and the galleys "Henry," "Accomac," 
and "Diligence." Three hundred marines, 
to be commanded by five captains and fif- 
teen lieutenants, were to be recruited. Ma- 
rines and sailors who enlisted for three years 
were to receive a bounty of $1,000. Naval 
officers were put upon the same footing in 
regard to pay, rations, and privileges as of- 
ficers of the same rank in the land service.^ 

When the Legislature came together in 
October, since the situation was still more 

1. Hening, X, 296-99. 



412 A^az'y of the American Revolution 

critical, it was moved to pass an additional 
act for the defence of the seacoast. This 
act shows that the navy was in sore need for 
seamen and money. It provided drastic 
measures to obtain both. Naval officers 
were now authorized, under certain restric- 
tions and limitations, to impress seamen. 
The eastern counties of the state were direct- 
ed to bind to the sea, ''under the most pru- 
dent captains that can be procured to take 
them," one-half of all orphans of certain de- 
scriptions living below the falls of the Vir- 
ginia rivers. A hospital for seamen was 
established at Hampton, to be maintained 
by a tax of nine pence a month on the salar- 
ies of all mariners and seamen in either the 
navy or the merchant service of the state. 
Officers and seamen were given the whole of 
their captures; and still other inducements 
to enlistment by way of pay and clothing 
were held out. 

Two new galleys, of the same construc- 
tion as those built by Congress in 1776, car- 
rying two 32's at the bow and at the stern, 
and 6's at the sides, were ordered for the de- 
fence of the Chesapeake. Five vessels of 
the state fleet were to be immediately made 
ready for service; and all the other naval 
vessels were to be sold and the proceeds de- 
voted to naval purposes. For the use of the 
navy import duties were laid upon rum, gin, 
brandy, and other spirits; on wine, molasses 
and sugar; and on all imported dry goods, 



iVai'3' of the American Revolution 413 

except salt, munitions of war, and iron from 
Maryland. Tonnage was laid upon mer- 
chant vessels. Despite these efforts few 
seamen and little money were raised, and the 
fleet during 1780 accomplished almost 
nothing.^ 

The salient event in the history of the 
Virginia navy in 1781 was the invasion of 
Arnold and Phillips during the first half of 
the year. Arnold was first reported on the 
coast of Virginia on December 29, 1780, 
when his fleet consisting of twenty-seven sail 
w^as seen at Willoughby Point.^ Governor 
Jefferson began at once to make strenuous 
efforts to get the Virginia fleet in condition to 
oppose Arnold. The role of admiral was an 
odd one for Jefferson. In February he sent 
Benjamin Harrison, speaker of the Virginia 
House of Delegates, to Philadelphia to re- 
quest of the French minister the aid of the 
French fleet. ^ A half-dozen or more priva- 
teers were taken into the service of the state. 
Twelve vessels of the state fleet of 1776-1779 
still remained. Most if not all of these ves- 
sels were either at the Chickahominy ship- 
yard and near by on the James, or else at 
the mouth of the James. Few of them were 
sufficiently manned to render much service. 
On April 26 Maxwell reported 78 men on 
board seven vessels, whose complement was 



1. Hening, X, 379-86. 

2. Ford, Writings of Jefferson, II, 392. 

3. Ibid., 443-44. 



414 ^(i^y of the American Revolution 

520 men. Other ships had neither arms nor 
men.^ 

*In April, 1781, Arnold and Phillips made 
their raid up the James, penetrating as far 
as Richmond. On April 21 and 22, a detach- 
ment under Lieutenant-Colonel Abercrombie 
destroyed the shipyard on the Chickahom- 
iny, including a number of naval craft and 
the warehouses. On April 27, at Osbornes 
on the James a few miles below Richmond, 
the Virginia fleet, supported by two or three 
hundred militia upon the shore opposite the 
British army, drew up to oppose the enemy. 
It consisted of six ships, eight brigs, five 
sloops, two schooners, and several smaller 
craft. Its chief vessels were the "Tempest," 
16, ''Renown," 16, and ''Jefferson," 14. The 
British sent a flag of truce to the Commo- 
dore of the Virginia fleet, proposing to treat 
with him for its surrender. He sent back 
the spirited reply that "he was determined 
to defend it to the last extremity." A few 
cannon planted on the shore soon gave the 
enemy a command of the situation. After 
a short engagement, the Virginians scuttled 
or set fire to several of their vessels and fled 
to the opposite shore. None of the fleet 
escaped. The British captured twelve ves- 
sels, which the Virginians were unable to 
destroy. On this expedition the British 
burnt the state rope-walk at Warwick. After 

1. Virginia Calendar of State Papers, I 
588; II, 74. 



Navy of the American Revolution 415 

the raid of Arnold and Phillips, but one ves- 
sel remained in the Virginia navy, the 
armed boat ''Liberty."^ 

The officers and seamen of the Virginia 
navy, thrown out of employment by the 
destruction of the fleet, aided the allied 
forces at the siege of Yorktown in collecting 
supplies and transporting troops. The boat 
''Liberty" was used as a transport; and also 
the ships ''Cormorant," "Loyalist," and 
"Oliver Cromwell," which three vessels, it 
is believed, Virginia purchased for this pur- 
pose. Soon after the surrender of Corn- 
wallis the Virginia General Assembly, recog- 
nizing that "during the continuance of the 
present expensive war it is necessary to hus- 
band the resources of the state with the 
utmost oeconomy," dismissed almost all the 
officers and seamen, the Commissioner of 
the Navy, the chaplains, surgeons, pay 
masters, and all others on the naval staff.^ 

A number of times during the Revolu- 
tion, and now for the last time in 1782, Vir- 
ginia and Maryland undertook to concert 
a naval defence of their trade on the Chesa- 
peake. The General Assembly of Virginia 
which met in May, 1782, appointed three 
commissioners to superintend the work of 



1. Almon's Remembrancer, 1781, II, 62- 
63, Arnold to Clinton, Petersburg, May 12 
1781. 

2. _ Hening, Statutes of Virginia, X, 450; 
Virginia Navy Papers, I, and II. 



4i6 Navy of the Ainerican Revolution 

protecting the Bay. The 'Tormorant" and 
''Liberty" were to be immediately prepared 
for this service. Two galleys and two 
barges or whale boats were to be built. For 
this work the state appropriated £1,000, the 
proceeds arising from the sale of the ''Loj^al- 
ist/' and certain tonnage and import duties. 
The commissioners were to fix the pay and 
subsistence of the seamen; the fleet was not 
to be sent outside of the Capes.^ 

The commissioners managed a small naval 
force during 1782 and 1783 until the war came 
to an end. Commodore Barron, stationed at 
Hampton, was chiefly occupied at this time 
with the exchanging of prisoners. Beyond 
the building of a few naval craft, it does not 
appear that this final naval enterprise of 
Virginia was attended with fruitful results. 
When peace was declared in the spring of 
1783, the commissioners had in different 
stages of construction the schooners ''Har- 
rison," ''Fly," and "Patriot," and the 
barges "York" and "Richmond.'' Virginia 
now disposed of all her fleet except the 
"Liberty" and "Patriot," which she re- 
tained as revenue cutters.^ In order to 
keep these two armed vessels in time of 
peace, Virginia, in accordance with a pro- 

1. Hening, Statutes of Virginia, XI, 42-44. 
In March, 1783, the three commissioners were 
Paul Loyall, Thomas Brown, and Thomas 
Newton, jr. — Virginia Calendar of State Pa- 
pers, III, 456. 

2. Virginia Navy Papers, II. 



Navy of the American Revolution 417 

vision in the Articles of Confederation, ob- 
tained the permission of Congress.^ These 
two boats were still in the employ of the 
state in 1787. The '^ Liberty'' saw more 
service than any other state or Continental 
vessel of the Revoiution. She was in the 
employ of Virginia from 1775 until 1787. 

1. Journals of Continental Congress, Oc- 
tober 3, 1783. 



CHAPTEJl XV 

THE NAVY OF SOUTH CAROLINA^ 

South Carolina employed her first armed 
vessels in obtaining a supply of gunpowder, 
the need of which article was so keenly felt 
throughout the colonies during the first 
years of the Revolution. In July, 1775, the 
South Carolina Council of Safety sent 
Captains John Barnwell and John Joy- 
ner of Beaufort with forty men in two large 
and well-armed barges to assist the Geor- 
gians in taking an English supply-ship, which 
was daily expected at Savannah. The en- 
terprise was wholly successful. The ship 
with its cargo of sixteen thousand pounds 
of gunpowder was captured by the combined 
forces of the two colonies. South Carolina 
sent four thousand pounds of her share of 
the powder to the Continental Congress at 
Philadelphia.^ 

1. In writing this chapter I have been 
much assisted by Mr. A. S. Salley, Jr., Secre- 
tary of the Historical Commission of South 
Carolina. 

2. Drayton, Memoirs of American Revo- 
lution, I, 269-71. Collections of South Caro- 
lina Historical Society, II, 50. 



A^avy of the American Revolution 419 

In the same month of July the Council of 
Safety planned to seize certain gunpowder 
stored at Nassau, New Providence, and for 
this purpose the ''Commerce/' a sloop be- 
longing to citizens of New York, was tempo- 
rarily taken into the service of the state. It 
will be recalled that Commodore Esek Hop- 
kins in the initial essay of the Continental 
fleet in February and March, 1776, attempt- 
ed to capture this gunpowder. Before the 
''Commerce'' was ready to set sail,word came 
that the brigantine "Betsey" from London 
with a cargo of ammunition was soon to 
arrive at St. Augustine. Captain Clement 
Lempriere, the commander of the "Com- 
merce," was therefore ordered to cruise off 
St. Augustine in watch for the expected ves- 
sel. On August 8 he captured the " Betsey" 
with her load of gunpowder amounting to 
almost twelve thousand pounds.^ 

Neither of these two episodes led to a per- 
manent naval armament. This, as was to be 
expected, was brought about by the neces- 
sity of protecting Charles Town, the capital 
and chief port of the Province. The critical 
month in South Carolina in 1775 was Sep- 
tember. During this month two of His 
Majesty's vessels, the "Tamar," 16. and 
"Cherokee," 6, lay in Charles Town harbor. 
It was in September that Lord William 



1. Collections of South Carolina Historical 
Society, II, 43, 44, 57, 59, 62, 63. Drayton, 
Memoirs of American Revolution, I, 304-06. 



420 Navy of the American Revolution 

Campbell, the Royal Governor of the Prov- 
ince, fled from Charles Town on board the 
"Tamar." In September the South Caro- 
lina Council of Safety began to seize the 
forts commanding the channel leading to 
Charles Town from the sea. The executive 
of the Revolutionary government at this 
time consisted of the Council of Safety of 
thirteen members. About the first of Oc- 
tober the Council of Safety obtained the 
schooner ''Defence" and placed it under 
the command of Captain Simon Tufts, a 
native of Massachussetts, but now a resident 
of Charles Town. The Council of Safety 
fixed the pay of officers and men on board 
the schooner. 

During November, naval affairs were 
chiefly in the hands of the Second Provin- 
cial Congress, the Revolutionary legislature, 
which body on November 10 appointed 
Edward Blake Commissary of Stores for 
the Naval Department. On November 11 
the ''Defence," 10, manned by her regular 
complement of seamen, and thirty-five ma- 
rines taken from the land forces, was detail- 
ed to cover a party sent to obstruct certain 
channels near Charles Town by sinking old 
schooners. While engaged in this service 
she exchanged shots with the "Tamar" and 
"Cherokee" without causing much damage 
on either side. On November 12, stirred 
by this encounter, the Provincial Congress 
voted, though by a narrow majority, to im- 



Navy of the American Revolution 421 

press, fit out, and arm the ship '' Prosper'' 
for the purpose of capturing the British 
ships in Charles Town harbor; and appoint- 
ed commissioners to superintend the work,^ 
The Provincial Congress having adjourned 
on the 29th of November, the Second Coun- 
cil of Safety continued the naval prepar- 
ations. On December 16 it appointed Wil- 
liam Henry Drayton, the well-known Revo- 
lutionary agitator and leader, to command 
the ''Prosper" in place of Captain Tufts 
who had some time before been transferred 
from the ''Defence" to the "Prosper."^ A 
third vessel was how obtained, the schooner 
"Comet," and was placed in charge of Cap- 
tain Joseph Turpin. Owing to the paucity 
of seamen in South Carolina, the Council of 
Safety in December directed Captain Rob- 
ert Cochran to proceed to Massachussetts 
and obtain recruits for the navy. When in 
January, 1776, Cochran was in Philadelphia, 
the delegates of South Carolina to the Conti- 
nental Congress called that body's atten- 
tion to Cochran's mission. In order that 
no friction should arise between Cochran 
and the military authorities in Massachus- 
etts over the enlistment of men, Congress 
recommended to him that he offer to sea- 



1. Journals of South Carolina Provincial 
Congress, November 9, 10, 12, 1775. 

2. Collections of South Carolina Historical 
Society, HI, Journals of South Carolina Coun- 
cil of Safety, December 16, 1775. 



422 Navy of the American Revolution 

men moderate wages and bounties; that he 
immediately repair to the camp at Cam- 
bridge and take Washington's advice; and 
that he enhst the seamen in those parts of 
the country where he would least interfere 
with the Continental service. The Massa- 
chusetts Council agreed to permit Cochran 
to raise three hundred men.^ South Caro- 
lina also enlisted seamen in Georgia.^ 

On February 15 the Second Provincial 
Congress, which had met on the 1st, appoint- 
ed a committee to report on the best means 
and the expense of building two frigates of 
thirty-two guns each. It authorized the 
enlisting, if necessary, of two hundred ma- 
rines. On March 5 a committee was ap- 
pointed to prepare * 'proper Rules and Arti- 
cles for the better regulation and govern- 
ment of the Navy of this Colony." On the 
25th, the report of this committee after 
amendment was adopted, and on the next 
day the respective rank of army and navy 
officers was fixed. On March 14th the Pro- 
vincial Congress authorized the committee 
at Georgetown, a port to the north of 
Charles Town, to purchase and fit out proper 
armed vessels for the defence of the trade of 
Georgetown, and on the same day gave 



1. Force, American Archives, 4th, IV, 
1307-08. Journals of Continental Congress, 
January 16, January 19, 1776. 

2. Gibbes, Documentary History of the 
American Revolution, 1764-1776, 258. 



1 



Navy of the American Revolution 423 

similar orders to a committee of Beaufort, a 
port to the south of Charles Town. Provis- 
ion was now m-ade for a Muster-Master Gen- 
eral of the Army and Navy.^ In March the 
armed schooner "Peggy" was in the service 
of the state. 

On March 26, 1776, a new government 
under a Constitution went into effect in 
South Carolina. This provided for a legis- 
lature consisting of two houses, a General 
Assembly and a Legislative Council. The 
executive of the state was a President, or 
"President and Commander-in-chief," the 
title ran, and a Privy Council of seven mem- 
bers. According to the constitution the 
captains of the navy were to be chosen by 
a joint ballot of the two houses of the Legis- 
lature, and were to be commissioned by the 
President.^ Early in April Colonel Pinck- 
ney presented in the General Assembly an 
ordinance to appoint a Commander of the 
Navy to be subject to the President.^ On 
April 9 the Legislature passed an act to 
prevent the desertion of soldiers and sailors. 
A hospital for sick and wounded soldiers and 
sailors was established at Charles Town. On 
April 11 the Legislature established a Court 
of Admiralty which was given jurisdiction 

1. Journals of South Carolina Provincial 
Congress, February 15, February 22, March 
5, 14, 25, 26, 1776. 

2. Constitution of South Carolina of 1776. 

3. Journals of South Carolina General As- 
sembly, April 10, April 11, 1776. 



424 Navy of tJie American Revolution 

over all captured ships belonging to ''Great 
Britain, Ireland, the British West Indies, 
Nova Scotia, East and West Florida." The 
facts in cases of capture were to be tried by 
a jury.^ 

On September 21, 1776, President John 
Rutledge, in a message to the Legislature, 
recommended the appointment of commis-» 
sioners to superintend the naval affairs of 
the state, believing that thereby the navy 
would be placed upon a better footing. On 
the same day, in accordance with the Presi- 
dent's recommendation, the General As- 
sembly appointed a committee to draft a 
bill. On October 8 an act was passed which 
established a Board of Naval Commission- 
ers, consisting of seven men, and empowered 
*'to superintend and direct all matters and 
things whatsoever to the navy of this state 
in any wise relating. "^ This act was model- 
led on the act of Virginia on the same sub- 
ject. It varies from the Virginia act in a 
few particulars, and is a little more detailed. 
The Navy Board was charged with the build- 
ing, hiring or buying of all naval vessels, 
and the arming, outfitting and provisioning 
of the same, and with the construction of 



1. Journals of South Carolina General As- 
sembly, April 11, 1776; Cooper, Statutes of 
South Carolina, IV, April 9, April 11, 1776. 

2. Journals of South Carolina General As- 
sembly, September 21, 1776; Cooper, Stat- 
utes of South Carolina, IV, Octobers, 1776. 



Navy of the American Revolution 425 

rope-walks and shipyards. It was author- 
ized to audit the naval accounts, draw war- 
rants on the treasury for necessary expen- 
ditures, recommend officers, fill vacancies 
temporarily with the approval of the Presi- 
dent, keep itself informed as to the state of 
the navy, and report thereon to the Legis- 
lature. With the concurrence of the Presi- 
dent and the Privy Council the Board could 
remove or suspend officers for neglect of 
duty or misbehavior. Soon after the organ- 
ization of the Board, the question was 
raised whether it had the power to order 
the vessels on cruises; the President and 
Privy Council decided that the Board had 
no such power, and that the detailing of 
vessels was a function of their own.^ In 
addition to its strictly naval duties the Board 
directed the procuring and fitting out of 
trading vessels and transports. 

The Navy Board held its first meeting on 
October 9, 1776, at Charles Town, and organ- 
ized by electing Edward Blake First Com- 
missioner. On the 12th it chose its clerk.^ 
The duty of this officer was to keep a regu- 
lar journal of the transactions of the Board; 
and once in three months, or oftener if nec- 
essary, to go aboard the vessels and take an 



1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, 
Journals of South Carolina Navy Board, Oc- 
tober 25, 1776. 

2. Ibid., Journals of South Carolina Navy 
Board, October 9, 12, 1776. 



426 A'az'y of tJic American Revolution 

account of the officers and seamen and pay 
them their wages. His salary was £1,400 
currency, a year. At first a majority of the 
Board constituted a quorum. When it be- 
came difficult to assemble four out of its 
seven members, two more members were 
added to the Board, and a quorum was re- 
duced to three men.^ The act which estab- 
lished the Board was to continue in effect 
two years. On October 9, 1778, the Board 
was continued until October 8, 1779, and 
from thence until the end of the Legislature 
then in session. The introduction of a 
bill into the House of Representatives on 
February 8, 1780, to repeal all previous 
acts establishing a Board of Naval Com- 
missioners makes it highly probable that 
the Navy Board was discontinued about 
this time.^ 

On taking charge of naval affairs the 
Navy Board found one of its most engrossing 
duties to be the purchasing of suppUes of 
all sorts — salted beef and pork, bread, 
pitch, tar, turpentine, tallow, duck, cord- 
age, and spars. On October 17, 1776, it ap- 
pointed a naval agent at Georgetown to 
procure and issue supplies to the schooner 
''Rattlesnake," Captain Stephen Seymour, 
now in the employ of the state for the pro- 



1. Cooper, Statutes of South Carolina, 
IV, August 23, 1777. 

2. Journals of South Carolina House of 
Representatives, February 8, 1780. 



Navy of the American Revolution 427 

tection of this port.^ The Board continued 
the building of four galleys, which had been 
begun by President Rutledge. In April, 

1777, it leased Captain Cochran's shipyard 
at Charles Town, together with five negroes, 
for the term of five years. ^ In October, 

1778, it bought of Paul Pritchard, ship- 
wright, eighty-five acres on Hobcaw creek, 
near Charles Town, for a shipyard.^ 

During 1777 and 1778 the Legislature 
passed a few ordinances relating to the navy. 
On January 16, 1777, it fixed the shares of 
prizes. Officers and seamen were to receive 
one-half the net proceeds of all captures. 
This half was then to be divided into six- 
teen parts and allotted to officers and sea- 
men according to a fixed scale. Captains 
were given two-sixteenths ; seamen and ma- 
rines, three-sixteenths."* In February the 
captors' share of vessels of war and priva- 
teers was increased to the whole of the prize. 
In January, 1778, a law of obvious purpose 
was passed, which freed all seamen who en- 
tered into the Continental or state naval 
service from the obligations of previous con- 

1. Force, American Archives, 5th, II, Jour- 
nals of South Carolina Navy Board, October 
17, 1776. 

2. Journals of South Carolina House of 
Representatives, September 10, 1779. The 
contract with Cochran was being dissolved. 

3. Notes of Mr. A. S. Salley, Jr. , Secretary of 
the Historical Commission of South Carolina. 

4. Cooper, Statutes of South Carolina, J.V, 
January 16, 1777. 



428 Navy of the American Revolution 

tracts made with the owners of private ships. 
In March, 1778, the appointment of a com- 
modore to command the navy of the state 
necessitated a new distribution of the pro- 
ceeds of captures among officers and seamen. 
The commodore's share was fixed at two- 
sixteenths.^ In October, 1778, the Legis- 
lature authorized the Navy Board to pur- 
chase any ''negroes or other slaves for the 
use of the publick shipyard or rope work/' 
which property was to be vested in the pub- 
lic forever.^ 

During 1776, 1777, and 1778 the Navy 
Board added a few vessels to the navy. 
Several galleys were built during this period. 
In the fall of 1776 the brigantine ''Notre 
Dame" was procured, armed, and sent to 
France under the command of Captain Rob- 
ert Cochran on a trading voyage.^ In 1777 
one finds the sloop "Beaufort" in the serv- 
ice of the state, being probably stationed 
at Beaufort for the defence of the trade of 
that port. Early in 1779 the Navy Board 
completed the construction of the brig "Hor- 
net." Now and then the state obtained the 



1. Cooper, Statutes of South Carolina, IV, 
February 13, 1777, January 26, March 28, 
1778. On February 13, 1777, a new act re- 
lating to the Court of Admiralty was passed. 

2. Ibid., October 9, 1778. 

3. In 1776 the following vessels were em- 
ployed as merchantmen: schooners, "Polly," 
"Peggy" and "Little Thomas;" the brigantine 
"Notre Dame," and the sloop "Margaret." 



Navy of the American Revolution 429 

loan of privateers for short periods. Infor- 
mation concerning South Carohna's priva- 
teers is scant. We know, however, that 
she had a considerable fleet. Between 
August 17, 1776, and April 16, 1777, Presi- 
dent Rutledge granted thirty-seven letters 
of marque.^ 

Few states exceeded South Carolina 
in naval expenditures. With the excep- 
tion of Massachusetts, the vessels of no 
other state went to sea so often as did those 
of South Carolina. The navy of South Car- 
ohna was smaller than that of Virginia, 
but much more active. From 1776 to 
1779 it captured some thirty-five small 
prizes, only about half of which, however, 
reached safe ports. ^ Its principal cruising 
grounds were off .the South Carolina and 
Florida coasts and in the West Indies. The 
South Carolina vessels frequently cruised 
off St. Augustine. This was an important 
British port during the Revolution, and 
many privateers and smaller British vessels 
visited it. The noting of a few captures 
will show the character of the work of the 
South Carohna navy. In July, 1777, the 
''Notre Dame" carried into a South Car- 
olina port the brig ''Judith," 12, laden with 



1. South Carolina Archives, Miscellaneous 
Records, A, 18, 19. 

2. Files of South Carolina and American 
General Gazette, and Gazette of State of South 
Carolina. 



430 Navy of the American Revolution 

dry goods for St. Augustine; and in October 
the same vessel captured the brig "John," 
and the schooner '^Jemmy and Sally" with 
cargoes of staves and shingles outward 
bound from the Mississippi.^ In the spring 
of 1779 the '^ Notre Dame/' "Hornet/' and 
"Eagle" made prizes of the sloop "Prince of 
Wales/' 12, and the brig "Royal Charlotte," 
both bound for Georgia, with West India 
products.^ 

In December, 1777, President Rutledge 
and the Privy Council, in opposition to the 
best mihtary judgment in South Carolina, 
concerted with Captain Nicholas Biddle, of 
the Continental frigate "Randolph," 32, an 
expedition to clear the coasts of the enemy's 
vessels. South Carolina furnished the ''No- 
tre Dame," 16, Captain Hall, and three pri- 
vateers, which were temporarily taken into 
the public service. These were the ships 
"General Moultrie," 18, Captain Sullivan, 
"Polly/' 16, Captain Anthony, and "Fair 
American," 14, Captain Morgan. One hun- 
dred and fifty South Carolina troops were 
taken on board to serve as marines. Sailing 
about February 1, 1779, the fleet soon cleared 
the coast of the enemy, and then proceeded 
to the West Indies on the lookout for rich 
West India merchantmen — an object which 



1. Gazette of State of South Carolioa, July 
21, November 4, 1777. 

2. Ibid., April 7, 1779. 



Navy of the American Revolution 431 

was probably in view from the first. On 
March 7, when the fleet was to the wind- 
ward of Barbadoes, the ''Randolph" fell in 
with the British ship of the line "Yar- 
mouth/^ 64. During a running fight an ex- 
plosion of tremendous force occurred on 
board the "Randolph." Burning spars and 
timbers six feet long, together Avith an un- 
damaged ensign, fell upon the decks of the 
"Yarmouth." The "Randolph," with al- 
most her entire crew of 315 men, including 
Captain Joseph loor and fifty South Caro- 
lina marines, sank soon after the accident. 
Five days after the fight the "Yarmouth" 
picked up four men clinging to the wreck- 
age, the only men rescued. Tw^o of the four 
South Carolina vessels, the "General Moul- 
trie" and the "Fair American," now re- 
turned home, taking on the way a valuable 
Guineaman. The "Notre Dame" and the 
"Polly" continued their cruise within the 
West Indies, the "Notre Dame" reaching 
as far westw^ard as the Isle of Pines. The 
two vessels captured eleven small prizes, 
a number of which, however, were recap- 
tured before reaching safe ports. ^ 

The transference of the seat of war from 
the Northern to the Southern states, in 



1. Moultrie, Memoirs of American Revolu- 
tion, I, 193-99; South Carolina and American 
General Gazette, April 23, May 28, June 4, 
1778; Ramsay, Revolution in South Carolina, 
I, 71; Clowes^'s Royal Navy, IV, 10. 



432 Navy of the American Revolution 

1779, and the British naval expedition 
against Charles Town, early in 1780, caused 
increased naval activity in South Carolina. 
In August, 1779, the House of Representa- 
tives sent to the Senate a bill offering boun- 
ties and fixing a new rate of wages for officers 
and seamen.^ In September the House 
passed a bill for building two floating bat- 
teries and four galleys.^ Acting on the 
recommendations of the Governor, the 
House in February, 1780, voted that it 
would be of public utility to employ a num- 
ber of negroes not to exceed one thousand 
to act as pioneers and fatigue men in the 
army and as oarsmen and mariners in the 
navy.^ Additional armed vessels were now 
obtained in different ways. During 1779 
the Governor issued commissions to four- 
teen vessels. A number of small craft, 
used chiefly as transports, were impressed.'* 

1. Journals of South Carolina House of 
Representatives, August 31, 1779. 

2. Ibid., September 6, 1779. The Senate 
was not wihing to make so large a naval in- 
crease. 

3. Ibid., February 14, 1780. 

4. South Carolina Archives, Miscellaneous 
Records, A. Among the vessels to which 
the Governor gave commissions were the fol- 
lowing: galleys "Congress," "South Edisto," 
"Revenge," "Beaufort," "Lee," "Marquis de 
Bretigny," and "Carolina;" sloop "Count 
de Kersaint," brigantines "General Lin- 
coln" and "Beaufort," schooner "Eshe," and 
the vessel "Lovely Julia." The following ves- 
sels, a number of which were impressed, were 



Navy of the American Revolution 433 

The "Notre Dame," 16, and the "General 
Moultrie/^ 20, were assigned to the defence 
of Charles Town. The state purchased 
from France the "Bricole,'^ 44, and the 
"Truite," 26. The "Bricole" was pierced 
for sixty guns, and mounted forty-four 
24's and 18's. She was the largest vessel 
owned by any of the states. For the 
defence of Charles Town France sent 
"L'Aventure,'' 26, and "Polacre,'' 16; and 
Congress the "Providence," 28, "Boston," 
24, "Queen of France," 28, and "Ranger," 
18.1 

The naval defence of Charles Town was in- 
trusted to Captain Abraham Whipple, the 
senior officer of the four Continental vessels. 
Whipple advised that a naval defence at the 
bar on the seacoast, which lay to the east- 
ward of the forts that commanded the en- 
trance to Charles Town harbor, should not 
be undertaken; and later he gave it as his 
opinion that it was impracticable for the 
armed vessels to cooperate with the forts. 
Such timid counsels prevailed, and no naval 
defence of Charles Town was made. With 
the exception of the "Ranger" all the ves- 
sels were dismantled and their guns and 
crews removed to reinforce the land batt'^r- 



in the service of the state in 1779 or 1780: gal- 
ley "Rutledge," schooners "Polly," "Rattle- 
snake," "Sally," "Anthony," "General Moul- 
trie," "Nancy," "Three Friends," brig "Wasp" 
and brigantine "Ballony." 

1. Almon's Remembrancer, 1780, 11,44-47. 



434 ^(^"i-'y of the American Revolution 

ies and troops in Charles Town. With the 
fall of the city on May 12, 1780, South Caro- 
lina lost her entire navy, with the exception 
of the frigate ''South CaroHna/' whose for- 
tunes we are about ready to consider. The 
''Bricol©/^ ''Truite/' ''General Moultrie/' 
and "Notre Dame" were sunk/ The "Bos- 
ton" and "Ranger" were added to the Royal 
Navy. 

In 1781, with the returning tide of the 
patriot forces a few small vessels were 
armed at Georgetown.^ In February, 1783, 
Governor Guerard recommended the pur- 
chase of a ship, which had lately been car- 
ried into Wilmington, North Carolina, for the 
defence of Charles Town harbor. The House 
was unfavorable to the transaction, be- 
cause of the lack of means, the difficulty 
of manning the ship, and the risk of bringing 
it around.^ In March, 1783, a committee 
of the House was appointed to consider 
w^hat arrangements should be made with re- 
spect to the naval officers of the state; and 
it reported that, by the Articles of Confed- 
eration, South Carolina was precluded from 

1. Previous to the siege of Charles Town, 
His Majesty's navy had captured the following 
vessels: February, 1777, "Defence" taken by 
the "Roebuck" and "Perseus;" December, 
1777, "Comet," taken by the "Daphne;" 
April, 1779, "Hornet," taken by the same. 

2. Gibbes, Documentary History of Amer- 
ican Revolution, 1776-1782, 181, 183. 

3. Journals of South Carolina House of 
Representatives, February 12, 1780. 



A^a^'3' of the American Revolution 435 

having a navy, and that it was therefore of 
the opinion that the state could not retain 
in its service its naval officers.^ 

A most interesting episode in the history 
of the South Carolina navy remains to be 
told. It properly begins with the commis- 
sioning on March 11, 1778, of Alexander Gil- 
Ion, a prosperous and influential merchant 
of South Carolina, to be a commodore in the 
navy w^ith ''full and ample power and au- 
thority to take the Command, Direction, 
and Ordering of the said Navy," agreeable 
to its rules and articles. On the same day 
John Joyner, WiUiam Robertson, and John 
McQueen received commissions as captains. 
On March 26 the state decided to raise 
abroad £500,000 currency, or £71,429 ster- 
Hng, for the purpose of building or purchas- 
ing three frigates. On July 17 Gillon was 
commissioned to go abroad and undertake 
the task of securing the loan and procuring 
the vessels. The exact sum which Gillon 
was now directed to borrow was less than 
£500,000 by the sum of the proceeds which 
he would derive from the sale of certain prod- 
uce, to be exported from South Carolina 
to Europe, and consisting chiefly of indigo 
and rice. Early in the fall of 1778 the 
"Notre Dame" carried Gillon, his three cap- 
tains, and other naval officers to Havana, 
whence they took passage to Europe. 

1. Journals of South Carolina House of 
Representatives, March 5, 1783. 



436 Navy of the American Revolution 

On January 31, 1779, Gillon was empow- 
ered to borrow, in addition to previous au- 
thorizations, £15,000 sterling, which was 
to be invested in arms, ammunition, and 
" Indian goods.'^ Of the total sum, £86,429, 
which he was authorized to obtain, he act- 
ually borrowed in Amsterdam, Ghent, Bor- 
deaux and Paris £46,725, and received as 
the proceeds arising from the sale of ex- 
ported produce £10,000. It is thus seen 
that Gillon, in his financial mission, was 
moderately successful. He was less for- 
tunate in making the proposed naval in- 
crease. He succeeded, however, in renting 
the frigate ''Indian" from the Chevalier 
Luxembourg for one-fourth of her prizes, 
for a period of three years. The reader 
recollects that this ship was built at Amster- 
dam in 1777 by the American Commission- 
ers at Paris, and that owing to lack of money 
and to complications growing out of the 
laws of neutrality, they had sold the "In- 
dian" to the French king. Louis XVI. had, 
in turn, ceded the ''Indian" to the Chevalier 
Luxembourg.^ 

Gillon renamed his frigate the "South 
Carolina," and mounted her with twenty- 
eight 32's and twelve 12's. Numerous de- 



1. South Carolina Archives, Miscellaneous 
Records, A, 66, 67; Journals of South Carolina 
House of Representatives, March 10, 1783, 
report of a committee on certain papers of 
Commodore Gillon. 



Navy of the American Revolution 437 

lays ensued in getting to sea. Owing to 
shallow water and the heavy draught of the 
"South Carolina/' she was from July to No- 
vember, 1780, moving from Amsterdam to 
the Texel. She spent the winter of 1780- 
1781 in a small creek near the Texel. These 
delays caused much expense, and in order 
to pay off some of his bills, Gillon, in the 
spring of 1781, sold to Colonel John Laurens 
for Congress military supplies, which he had 
recently purchased for South Carolina, to 
the amount of £10,000. Laurens now en- 
gaged Gillon to take these supplies together 
with others to Philadelphia. Gillon had 
been given full power to man and officer his 
vessel, having carried over with him fifteen 
commissions and thirty warrants in blank. 
In March, 1781, he wrote that he had about 
two hundred men on board, and that he 
expected two hundred and eighty from Dun- 
kirk which the Chevalier Luxembourg had 
raised for the state. ^ 

The ''South Carolina" finally got to sea 
about the first of August, 1781, leaving be- 
hind the convoy which had expected to ac- 
company her. Gillon' s movements and 
dealings abroad are not at all points clear. 
He aroused suspicions as to his honesty, 
and made a number of enemies. Exactly 
why he did not at once proceed to Phila- 



1. South Carolina Historical and Genealogi- 
cal Magazine, I, 28-32, 136-47, two letters of 
Gillon. 



438 Navy 0) the American Revolution 

delphia with the supplies for Congress 
which he had on board is not certain. On 
saihng he cruised for a month in the North 
Sea, and for a time near the Enghsh Chan- 
nel, and then, about the first of October, 
he put into Coruiia, Spain. Gillon said 
that he had been detained by contrary 
wdnds, and had returned for fresh provisions 
before sailing for America.^ 

On January 12, 1782, Gillon arrived at 
Havana with five valuable Jamaicamen, 
loaded with rum and sugar, and said to be 
worth $150,000. Here he found the Span- 
iards planning a descent on the Bahama Isl- 
ands, and he now agreed to take command 
of the sea-forces consisting of fifty-nine 
Spanish and American vessels — probably 
chiefly Spanish. General Cadrigal com- 
manded the troops. The expedition left 
Havana on April 22, and on May 8 the Ba- 
hamas surrendered without firing a shot. 
Gillon not very modestly attributed the suc- 
cess of the enterprise to the ''great atten- 
tion which the captains and officers of the 
American vessels of war paid in conveying 
such a fleet through so difficult and so un- 
frequented a passage, with a beating wind 
all the way, whereby we disappointed any 
plans the enemy might have formed of at- 



1. New York Historical Society Collec- 
tions, Deane Papers, IV, 450, 468, 478, 519; 
Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence. IV, 546- 
47, note. 



Navy of the American Revolution 439 

tacking us in our way through the gulph of 
Florida/^ The island surrendered, not to 
the joint American and Spanish forces, but 
to the Spaniards alone. ^ It was reported 
that the Spaniards and Gillon captured 
three hundred troops and ninety sail of ves- 
sels.^ 

On May 28th the ''South Carolina'' ar- 
rived in Philadelphia, where she was refit- 
ting during the summer and fall of 1782. 
An agent of the Chevalier Luxembourg 
now removed Gillon from the command 
of his vessel, which was given to Captain 
Joyner. The "South Carolina" did not get 
to sea until December, 1782. Soon after 
leaving the Capes of the Delaware she was 
chased by a British squadron, which, after a 
race of eighteen hours, overhauled her, and 
at the end of a two hours' fight, forced her to 
surrender.^ For the loss of this vessel the 
Chevalier Luxembourg, in accordance with 
the terms of his contract, demanded from 
South Carolina the payment of 300,000 
livres. Gillon asserted that Luxembourg 
had forfeited all right to the money by dis- 



1. Pennsylvania Packet, March 5, May 31, 
and June 4, 1782. The issue of June 4 con- 
tains a letter of Gillon to Governor Mathewes 
of South Carolina, dated May 15, 1782, con- 
taining an account of the expedition ; Gibbes, 
Documentary History of American Revolu- 
tion, 1776-1782, 170. 

2. Connecticut Gazette, June 14, 1782. 

3. Clowes's Royal Navy, IV, 91. 



440 Navy of the American Revolution 

placing him at Philadelphia from his com-j 
mand of the vessel. Further, Gillon de- 
clared that the Chevalier had subjected 
the state to serious losses by sending its 
marines, in the winter of 1780-1781, on] 
an expedition to the Island of Jersey. M 
One estimate makes the total cost of the 
frigate to the state more than $200,000, and 
another puts it at $500,000.^ The Luxem- 
bourg claims remained unsettled until De- 
cember 21, 1814, when the state made a 
final payment of $28,894 to the heirs of the 
Chevaher.^ South Carolina is still pros- 
ecuting her claims against the United States 
for a reimbursement of the expenses con- 
tracted in behalf of the ''South Carolina."* 



1. Journals of South Carolina House of 
Representatives, March 10, 1783. 

2. McCrady, South Carolina in Revolu- 
tion, 1775-1780, 219. 

3. Cooper, Statutes of South Carolina, V, 
December 21, 1814. 

4. Conversations with Hon. J. T. Gantt, 
Secretary of State of South Carolina. 



CHAPTER XVI 

THE MINOR NAVIES OF THE SOUTHERN 
STATES 

Naval administration in Maryland was 
vested in the Committee of Safety until 
March 22, 1777, when it passed to the Gov- 
ernor and Council, the executive under the 
first state constitution of Maryland. The 
Committee was given a free hand in its con- 
trol of the navy. The Provincial Conven- 
tion empowered it to fix the pay of officers 
and seamen, and to appoint the command- 
ers of the smaller naval vessels. The Con- 
vention, however, established the pay of 
marines, which was the same as that of the 
state troops; and it decided that the uni- 
form of the marines should be a blue hunt- 
ing shirt.^ The first naval work of the 
Committee of Safety was the fitting and 
arming, in February and March, 1776, of 
the ship "Defence," twenty- two 6-pound- 
ers. Captain James Nicholson, the chief ves- 
sel in the Maryland navy. In March the 
schooner "Resolution" was purchased as a 

1. Force, American Archives, 4th, IV, 744- 
45; 5th. Ill, 94. 



442 Navy of the American Revolution 

tender for the ''Defence." The Committee 
of Safety, which held its meetings in Annap- 
olis was early in 1776 assisted in its work at 
Baltimore, the chief port of the state, by 
the Baltimore Committee of Observation; 
and, later in the year, by Jesse Hollings- 
worth, who was appointed naval agent for 
Baltimore. 

In June and July, 1776, the Provincial 
Convention ordered the Committee of Safety 
to build seven row-galleys, and to fit out 
three small vessels, mounting not more 
than ten guns each, and a number of armed 
boats not to exceed six.^ By the spring 
of 1777 the Committee of Safety had built, 
fitted, and officered the galleys ''Baltimore,'' 
"Conqueror," "Independence," and "Ches- 
ter," and the armed boat "Plater;" it had 
in process of construction, ready to launch, 
the galleys "Johnson" and "Annapolis," 
and it had purchased the tender "Amelia" 
and the schooner "Dolphin." During the 
first years of the war the Committee of 
Safety hired or purchased several small ves- 
sels, which were used chiefly as merchant- 
men.^ It is not always easy to distinguish 
these craft from the naval vessels, which 



1. Force, American Archives, 4th, VI, 
1487, 1496. 

2. The following vessels were employed as 
trading craft: Sloop "Molly;" schooners 
"Ninety-Six," "General Smallwood," and 
"Friendship;" brigs "Sam" and "Friend- 
ship," and ship "Lydia." 



Navy of the American Revolution 443 

were now and then sent on trading voyages. 
Maryland's most common commercial ven- 
ture was to ship flour and tobacco to the 
firm of Harrison and Van Bibber at Martin- 
ique, and there laden her vessels for the 
homeward voyage with munitions of war.^ 

As an inducement to recruits, the Pro- 
vincial Convention, in October, 1776, offered 
a bounty of $20 to able seamen, and $10 to 
landsmen. Officers and seamen who re- 
ceived bounties and wages were given one- 
third of their prizes, the share granted by 
the Continental Congress ; those who did not 
receive bounties and wages were given the 
whole of their prizes.^ Maryland was un- 
able to meet the competition with privateers 
for seamen, and her vessels were often forced 
to remain in port for lack of crews. In De- 
cember, 1776, the naval agent at Baltimore 
wrote that he could ^^load twenty vessels 
rather than man and sail two. The money 
paid to captains and sailors is wonderful, 
and no way to shun it.^'^ 

Maryland established in her navy the 
rank of commodore. On June 8, 1778, her 
Governor commissioned Thomas Grason, 
who had been appointed commodore on 
April 21 by the General Assembly.^ In 
1782 a ' 'Commodore Whaley" was in the 



1. Maryland Archives, XI, XII, XVI, XXI. 

2. Force, American Archives, 5th, III, 128. 

3. Ibid., 1025. 

4. Maryland Archives, XXI, 125. 



444 -\^'<^'V of the American Revolution 

naval service. Her most prominent cap- 
tains were James Nicholson, who in 1776 
became the senior captain in the Continental 
navy; and George Cook, who had served 
seven years in the British navy. Lieuten- 
ant John Henry Boucher resigned early in 
1776 to enter the Virginia naval service, 
where he soon rose to the highest rank. 

In May, 1776, the Provincial Convention, 
pursuant to the resolves of the Continental 
Congress, established a Court of Admiralty, 
consisting of a judge, marshal, and register. 
The procedure was to be that usual in such 
courts; trial by jury was made optional; 
and the judge was permitted to determine 
the places of sitting.^ The privateers of 
Maryland were generally small craft, mount- 
ing on the average eight 4-pounders. They 
plied their trade chiefly in Chesapeake Bay. 
From April 1, 1777, to March 14, 1783, a 
period of almost six years, Maryland issued 
letters of marque and reprisal to 248 pri- 
vateers, carrying a total of 1810 guns.^ 

Since a number of her vessels had been for 
some time idle for lack of crews, Mary- 
land in the first half of 1779 sold all 
of her naval craft, except the galleys 
''Conqueror'^ and ''Chester," and the 
schooner ''Dolphin."^ From 1780 to the 

1. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 1596, 
1597-98. 

2. Scharf, History of Maryland, II, 205. 

3. Maryland Archives, XXI, 399. 



Navy of the American Revolution 445 

end of the Revolution the trade in the Ches- 
apeake, and the property of the inhabitants 
of the Maryland coasts, on both sides of the 
Bay, suffered severely from the ravages of 
the British refugee barges, privateers, and 
small naval craft. These conditions led 
Maryland to make frequent attempts, during 
the last years of the war, to provide a naval 
armament for the defence of the Bay. In 
1780 she was moved to renew her naval ac- 
tivities by still other considerations. The 
success of the British this year in South and 
North Carolina and on the coasts of Vir- 
ginia made the outlook for Maryland very 
threatening. It was also known that Clin- 
ton wished to carry the war into Maryland 
and Virginia. 

In October, 1780, Maryland passed her 
first act for the defence of the Bay; The 
Governor and Council were ordered to pro- 
vide, officer, and man four large barges or 
row-boats, each to carry at least twenty- 
five men, one galley to be armed with two 
18's and two 9's, and one sloop or schooner 
to carry ten 4's. They were to enlist one 
hundred marines for three years. The ma- 
rines were to be paid £2, 5s. a month and a 
bounty of $40, and the seamen £3 a month 
and a bounty of $20.^ During the May ses- 
sion of the legislature in 1781, just after Ar- 
nold's invasion into Virginia, this act was 

1. Statutes of Maryland, October session, 
1780, chapter XXXIV. 



446 Navy of the American Revolution 

amended. The Governor and Council were 
now directed to procure two galleys and a 
number of barges not to exceed eight.^ 

In passing, mention should be made of 
the service which Maryland rendered the 
Continental army in 1781, in transporting 
troops. When, in the spring of that year, 
Lafayette and his army were on their way 
to Virginia to attempt the capture of Ar- 
nold, Maryland impressed upwards of one 
hundred transports, together with three 
small armed vessels, which she placed under 
the command of Captain James Nicholson. 
This fleet carried a large part of Lafayette's 
troops, stores, guns, and baggage from the 
head of Elk to Annapolis. In August and 
September the state rendered similar aid to 
Washington's army, which was then on its 
way to Yorktown. Every vessel in the 
state was pressed into service.^ 

During the last year of the war the Brit- 
ish were especially annoying to the trade 
and coasts of Maryland and Virginia. Fif- 
teen or twenty small craft which made their 
headquarters on the islands in the Chesa- 
peake were very destructive, and their dep- 
redations called forth protective measures 
not only in Maryland, but in Virginia, as 
we have seen. In each state private initi- 



1. Statutes of Maryland, Mav session, 
1781, chapter XXXIV. ^ 

2. Scharf, History of Maryland, II, 439-40. 
456. 461. 



Naz'y of the American Revolution 447 

ative did what it could to stop the pillaging, 
but it was not able to cope with the en- 
emy. 

On June 13, 1782, the Maryland legisla- 
ture appointed William Paca, Walter Tilgh- 
man and Robert Goldsborough commis- 
sioners to provide for the defence of the Bay. 
They were ordered to procure four barges 
and a galley or other vessel of force, to fit 
them for immediate service against the en- 
emy, and to turn them over to the Govern- 
or and Council when ready to be employed. 
The legislature also appointed William Han- 
son Harrison, a commissioner to go to Rich- 
mond and concert with the Virginia execu- 
tive or legislature a joint defence of the Bay. 
A new naval establishment was now effected. 
The Governor and Council were to raise and 
officer two hundred and fift}^ able seamen, 
watermen, landsmen, and marines, who were 
to serve until January 1, 1783, or longer. 
They were to fix the pay and rations of the 
officers. Officers and seamen who should 
lose a limb, or be otherwise maimed or hurt, 
were to receive the same benefits which the 
state should hereafter give to her soldiers 
in the Continental army. The naval forces 
were to be subject to the naval rules and 
regulations provided by Congress for the 
Continental navy. A penalty of £50 was 
prescribed for enticing seamen away from 
the state service. The expense incurred 
in providing this naval increase was to be 



448 iVa^'v of the American Revolution 

met chiefly from an appropriation of £10,000 
and from the sale of the confiscated property 
of Tories.^ 

Owing to the continuance of the depreda- 
tions of the British, the legislature in its 
November session of 1782 passed another 
act for the defence of the Bay. The Govern- 
or and Council were directed to fit out a 
certain galley or ship, now building for the 
state, and the barges * 'Somerset,'' 'Terri- 
ble,'' 'Tearnaught," and ''Defence," and en- 
list three hundred and fifty men to serve until 
January 1, 1784. Two-thirds of the proceeds 
of captures were now to be given to the cap- 
tors. The expense of this establishment 
was to be met by import duties on rum, 
brandy, and other distilled spirits; on wine, 
loaf sugar, and coffee; and on all goods 
and merchandise, with certain exceptions.^ 

The navy of Maryland rendered miscel- 
laneous services. It convoyed merchant- 
men, imported and distributed arms and 
provisions, transported troops, watched the 
fleet of the enemy to report its movements, 
and defended the trade and coasts of the 
state. Except when used for commer- 
cial purposes, Maryland's vessels rarely 
passed outside the Capes at the mouth of 
the Chesapeake. Attempts which were 

1. Statutes of Maryland, April session, 
1782, Chapter III. 

2. Statutes of Maryland, November ses- 
sion, 1782, Chapter XXVI. 



Navy of the American Revolution 449 

made to bring about the cooperation of the 
Maryland and Virginia fleets did not often 
succeed. A few small prizes were taken, 
but none of them were .of much value. In 
the fall of 1776 the '^Defence/' Captain Cook, 
cruised as far southward as the West Indies, 
and captured five small prizes, laden with 
logwood, mahogany, indigo, rum, and sugar.^ 
Several sharp encounters between the ves- 
sels of Maryland and the enemy took place 
in the Bay. As early as March, 1776, the 
"Defence," 22, Captain James Nicholson, 
checked the advance up the Chesapeake of 
the British sloop-of-war "Otter," 10, and 
recaptured several prizes.^ Now and then 
attempts were made to dislodge the British 
from some of the islands in the Bay. So 
late as the latter part of March, 1783, the 
state sent a small schooner and two barges 
against a rendezvous of the British on 
Devil's Island, one of the Tangiers.^ 

On November 30, 1782, the Battle of the 
Barges occurred near the Tangier islands. 
The mortality of the Americans in this en- 
gagement was relatively greater than in 
any other sea fight of the Revolution. In 
its carnage and in the bravery displayed 
by the Americans, this fight does not suffer 
from a comparison with that of Jones off 
Flamborough Head. The Maryland fleet, 



1. M^yland Archives, XII, 500. 

2. Ridgely, Annals of Annapolis, 175-77. 

3. Scharf, History of Maryland, II, 481-82. 



450 Navy of the American Revolution 

which had been joined by a volunteer Vir- 
ginia barge, was commanded by Commodore 
Whaley of the barge 'Trotector/' The Brit- 
ish fleet of barges was under the command 
of Captain Kidd of the ''Kidnapper/' mount- 
ing 18-pounders. For one cause or another 
the "Protector" was the only American barge 
which engaged the British fleet. While the 
''Protector" inflicted much damage on the 
vessels of her adversary, she naturally was 
unable to fight long against such tremendous 
odds. An extract from the simple and 
pathetic narrative of the fight written by Col- 
onel John Cropper, a volunteer Virginia of- 
ficer on board the "Protector," possesses in- 
terest: "Commodore Whaley was shot down 
a little before the enemy boarded, acting the 
part of a cool, intrepid, gallant officer. Cap- 
tain Joseph Handy fell nigh the same time, 
nobly fighting with one arm, after the loss 
of the other. Captain Levin Handy was 
badly wounded. There went into action 
in the Protector sixty-five men, twenty-five 
of them were killed and drowned, twenty- 
nine were wounded, some of whom are since 
dead, and eleven only escaped being wound- 
ed, most of whom leaped into the water to 
save themselves from the explosion." Colo- 
nel Cropper, to whom, on the death of Wha- 
ley, the command of the "Protector" fefl, 
was wounded three times, "and after the 



Navy of the American Revolution 451 

surrender knocked down by a four-pound 
rammer."^ 

During the last years of the war Maryland 
in her attempts to defend the Chesapeake, 
obtained as many as ten barges.^ She had 
also in the naval service at this time a 
schooner, the ''Flying Fish." The end of 
her navy may be dated with the statute 
passed by her legislature in May, 1783, 
which authorized the Intendant to sell ''the 
galley and the barges."^ . 

North Carolina's initial step in procuring 
a naval armament was taken on December 
21, 1775, when her Council of Safety re- 
solved to fit out three armed vessels for the 
defence of the trade of the state. It ap- 



1. Southern Literary Messenger, XXIV, 
(1857), 218, Colonel John Cropper to Colonel 
Williams Da vies, his superior in command in 
the Continental line. 

2. Scharf enumerates the following barges: 
"Revenge," "Terrible," "Intrepid," "Pro- 
tector," "Experiment," "Venus," "Defence," 
"Reformation," "Dolphin," and "Fear- 
naught." These barges were about forty-two 
feet long, eight feet wide, and three deep. 
Each carried about twenty-four oars, from six- 
teen to thirteen feet long, and mounted two 
large guns. — Scharf, History of Maryland, II, 
204. 

3. Statutes of Maryland, April session, 
1783, chapter XVI, Votes and Proceedings of 
Maryland Senate, April session, 1783, 63. 
For the pay-rolls of the "Flying Fish," "De- 
fence," and several Maryland barges, see 
Maryland Archives, XVIII, 606-15. 



452 Navy of the American Revolution 

pointed three Boards of Commissioners, 
each of which was to immediately purchase, 
arm, man, and victual a vessel. The board 
for Cape Fear was composed of five men ; for 
Newbern, of eight; and for Edenton, of six.^ 
Since it proved difficult to assemble a quor- 
um of the Newbern Board, the Council of 
Safety in June, 1776, vested its powers in 
three of its members.^ In May, 1776, the 
Provincial Congress fixed the monthly 
wages of officers, seamen, and marines. Cap- 
tains were to be paid £10; lieutenants, mas- 
ters, captains of marines, and doctors, £8 
each; marines, £2, 13s., 4d.; ''seamen com- 
plete," £4; ''seamen not complete," £3.^ 

By October, 1776, the Cape Fear Board 
had fitted out the brigantine "Washing- 
ton;" the Newbern Board, the brigantine 
"Pennsylvania Farmer;" and the Edenton 
Board, the brigantine "King Tammany." 
The Council of Safety now ordered these 
three vessels to protect the trade of the state 
at Ocracoke Bar, and to proceed against the 
enemy's Jamaicamen homeward bound from 
the West Indies. "It may be necessary to 
inform you," it wrote on October 1 to Cap- 
tain Joshua Hampstead of the "Pennsyl- 
vania Farmer," "that the Jamaica fleet will 
sail for Europe about the middle of this 
month under the convoy of a twenty-gun 



1. North Carolina Colonial Records, X, 352. 

2. Ibid., 637. 

3. Ibid., 584. 



I 



Navy of the American Revolution 453 

ship only, from the best intelligence we can 
•obtain."^ 

For one reason or another these three 
vessels accomplished very little. For a long 
time the "Washington/' Captain Edward 
Ingraham, could not obtain a crew. The 
*' Pennsylvania Farmer/' Captain Joshua 
Hampstead, was idle during the summer of 
1776, for lack of shot. James Davis, one 
of the Commissioners for fitting out this ves- 
sel, made serious accusations against his fel- 
low Commissioners and the officers and crew 
of the vessel. As Davis had suffered real or 
supposed injuries at their hands, his w^ords 
no doubt must be heavily discounted. In 
October, 1776, he wrote that the 'Tennsyl- 
vania Farmer" lay in Newbern "with 110 
men on board at the Expence of near Forty 
Pounds per day, upwards of six months ; in 
the most inglorious, inactive, and dissolute 
state that perhaps was ever suffered in any 
Country." The crew of the vessel consisted 
of "men of all nations and conditions, Eng- 
lish, Irish, Scotch, Indians, Men of Wars 
Men,and the most abandoned sett of wretches 
ever collected together. Two of the officers 
broke open the Gun Room, and with a num- 
ber of the men went off with the Boat, with 
Intent to join Lord Dunmore's fleet, and 
actually reached Currituck County. They 



1. North Carolina Colonial Records, X, 
831-32, 848-49, 875-77; North Carolina State 
Records, XI, 356. 



454 ^^a'^y of the American Revolution 

were apprehended, and are still at large on 
board. They have wasted near 100 pounds 
of powder in wantonly firing at and bring- 
ing to all Boats, Canoes, and Vessels of every 
sort, even Passengers in the Ferry Boat 
have been insulted. Capt. Thos. Shine of 
the Militia, with his Company on board com- 
ing up to the General Muster, was fired on 
and a ball passed within a few inches of his 
Arm."^ These are but few of the derelictions 
contained in Davis's remarkable list. His 
overstatement of his case causes one to sus- 
pect that he was not entirely free from 
malice. 

By December, 1777, the "Washington" 
was ordered to be sold; and commissioners 
had been appointed to load the other two 
vessels and send them on voyages to foreign 
ports. In April, 1778, the legislature de- 
cided to sell the "Pennsylvania Farmer.'' 
On May 30 this vessel at a public sale in 
Edenton "was cried out by John Blackburn 
on Mr. Joseph Hewes, after which Mr. Hewes 
denied having bid the sum which she was 
cried out at."^ 

No other subject of naval interest en- 
gaged the attention of North Carolina so 
much as the defence of Ocracoke Inlet. It 
is recalled that the waters of Pamhco and 



1. North Carolina Colonial Records, X, 
834-36. 

2. North Carolina State Records, XII, 173, 
244, 623, 796. 



Navy of the American Revolution 455 

Albemarle Sounds are separated from the 
Atlantic by a long sandbar, which is only at 
a few points broken by inlets. These con- 
nect the waters of the Atlantic with the 
waters of the Sound. The most important 
inlet at the time of the Revolution was that 
of Ocracoke. The protecting and the keep- 
ing open of this entrance was a matter of im- 
portance not only to North Carolina, but to 
Virginia and the Continental Congress, as 
well. Most of the foreign trade of Newbern 
and Edenton, the two main ports of the 
state, passed through this inlet. In a simi- 
lar way, the trade of Southern Virginia, out- 
ward or inward bound, found it convenient 
to use this channel. In the first years of the 
Revolution, especially in 1778, not a few 
goods coming from foreign marts, and des- 
tined for the Continental Army, rather than 
risk capture off the entrance to the Chesa- 
peake or the Delaware Bay, entered Ocra- 
coke, passed on through Pamlico and Albe- 
marle Sounds into Chowan River, and 
thence by the branches of this river to the 
town of South Quay, in southern Virginia, 
near the confluence of the Nottaway and 
Blackwater rivers. From South Quay the 
goods were carried by wagons to Suffolk on 
the Nansemond, and thence by boat up the 
Nansemond into the James. This route 
constituted the southern division of the so- 
called ''Inland Navigation," It was along 
this road that North Carolina salt pork and 



456 Navy of the American Revolution 

beef, and shoes made by North CaroHna 
Quakers, passed northward on their way to 
the "Grand Army." In 1778 and 1779 
South Quay and Suffolk were important en- 
trepots for Continental goods. 

Since the keeping open .of communication 
through Ocracoke Inlet was of importance 
to both North Carolina and Virginia, the 
two states concerted a joint naval arma- 
ment for this purpose. On May 9, 1776, 
the North Carolina Provincial Congress ap- 
pointed Allen and Thomas Jones to attend 
the Provincial Congress of Virginia, "for 
the purpose of recommending to them the 
expediency of fitting out two Armed, Vessels 
at the expense of that Colony, to act in con- 
junction with the armed vessels already 
fitted out by this Colony for the protection 
of the trade at Ocracoke."^ As her part of 
the joint undertaking, Virginia agreed to 
construct at South Quay two galleys, to be 
employed in the defence of the Inlet. 

Virginia carried out her promise, and built 
at the "South Quay ship yard'' two ships, 
the -"Caswell" and "Washington."^ North 
Carolina ordered her brigantines to defend 
Ocracoke; and she voted £2,000 towards 
the equipping of Virginia's ships, and ap- 
pointed commissioners to invest this money 
in anchors, guns, rigging, and canvas.^ 



1. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 1357. 

2. These vessels were at first called galleys. 

3. North Carolina Colonial Records, X, 981. 



Navy of the American Revolution 457 

Finally, as we shall see, she maintained at 
her expense one of the Virginia ships on the 
station at Ocracoke for a considerable 
period. She did not, however, meet Vir- 
ginia's expectations, which state several 
times expressed the belief that North Caro- 
lina had not done her share in keeping up 
the joint establishment.^ 

Until 1778 the trade which passed through 
Ocracoke was rather free from annoyance. 
It was in January of that year that Joshua 
Martin, the late Royal Governor of North 
Carolina, wrote from New York to Lord 
George Germaine in London: "That the 
contemptible port of Ocracock has become 
a great channel of supply to the rebels, while 
the more considerable ports have been 
watched by the King's ships. They have 
received through it considerable importa- 
tions."^ On January 1, 1778, there arrived 
at Newbern a sloop from Martinique, a 
schooner from St. Eustatius, a schooner 
with salt from Bermuda, a French schooner 
from Hispaniola, and two schooners from 
the Northern states; a French scow was at 
the same time reported at Ocracoke.^ A 
a letter from Edenton, dated June 9, informs 
us that several foreign vessels were at the 
Inlet, and that a sloop had recently arrived 



1. North Carolina State Records, XIV, 19, 
126. 

2. Ibid., XIII, iii-iv. 

3. Ibid., 354. 



458 Navy of the American Revolution 

at Edenton from France, which had on 
board for the Continental Congress thir- 
teen thousand pairs of shoes, a large quan- 
tity of clothing, and a ''marble Monument 
for Genl. Montgomery."^ 

In the spring of 1778 the North Carolina 
legislature voted to purchase from Virginia 
the ship 'Taswell," stating that it had not 
been able to keep its agreement with Vir- 
ginia in providing a joint defence of Ocra- 
coke. The legislature fixed the pay of the 
officers and seamen on board the ''Caswell."^ 
In May this ship, under the command of 
Captain Willis Wilson, with one hundred 
and seventy men on board, lay off Ocracoke 
bar. Captain Wilson reported to Governor 
Caswell on May 20 that the place was not in- 
fested with British cruisers, and that a French 
ship and brig lay outside the Inlet, waiting 
to come in. In June, however, Wilson 
wrote that '' the enemy (one ship, two sloops, 
and a brig) take a peep at us every now and 
then, but are not disposed to venture in."^ 
A sloop was now purchased at Beaufort, to 
act as a tender for the ^'Caswell," and Rich- 

1. North Carolina State Records, XIV, 
154-55. 

2. Ibid., XII, 574-75, 742, 746; XIII, 138- 
39, 171-72. In June, 1779, Governor Jefferson 
of Virginia wrote to Governor Caswell offering 
to sell both the "Caswell" and "Washington." 
Virginia had found the trade through Ocra- 
coke inconvenient. — North Carolina State 
Records, XIV, 126, 136. 

3. Ibid., XIII, 132, 171. 



Navy of the American Revolution 459 

ard Ellis was appointed agent at Newbern 
to purchase provisions and naval supplies.^ 

In December, 1778, the "Caswell" was 
still afloat, but by June, 1779, she had sunk 
at her station at Ocracoke.^ With the loss 
of this vessel North Carolina's naval enter- 
prises came to an end. Her attention was 
now engrossed by threatening invasions of 
the enemy from South Carolina. 

North Carolina maintained admiralty 
courts at several ports on the coast. There 
were such courts at Beaufort, Bath, Roa- 
noke and Currituck. As early as April 25, 
1776, a special court of admiralty was ap- 
pointed to try a prize case.^ A few of the 
privateers of this state rendered valuable 
services. The brig "Bellona," 16, Captain 
Pendleton, fitted out at Newbern, cruised 
very successfully. 

Georgia's naval armament was small and 
unimportant. Her Provincial Congress, 
however, commissioned one of the first 
armed vessels of the Revolution. In June, 
1775, it gave Captains Oliver Bowen and 
Joseph Habersham command of a 10-gun 
schooner, and directed them to assist Cap- 
tains Joyner and Barnwell of South Caro- 
lina in capturing a certain British ship, laden 
with powder, and expected to arrive at Sa- 



1. North Carolina State Records, XIII, 
138-39, 174-75. 

2. Ibid., XIV, 136. 

3. Force, American Archives, 4th, V, 1339. 



460 Navy of the American Revolution 

vannah. On July 10 the joint forces of the 
two states captured the ship and obtained 
thirteen thousand pounds of the highly 
prized article. Georgia sent five thousand 
of her share of nine thousand pounds to the 
Continental Congress at Philadelphia.^ 

On July 5, 1776, the Continental Congress 
resolved to build four galleys under the direc- 
tion of the Georgia Provincial Congress.^ In 
August the Committee of Safety was build- 
ing some row-galleys, and also fitting out an 
armed vessel for which purpose £2,000 
were voted. On August 28 the Committee 
of Safety ordered Captain Bowen to go to 
Hispaniola to purchase armed vessels to the 
amount of £3,000, materials for fitting out 
vessels, and various warlike stores. In Oc- 
tober it ordered Captain Pray to go to Cape 
Francois on a similar errand. Pray was 
authorized to mount on his vessel carrying 
his purchases to Georgia as many guns as it 
would conveniently bear.^ Whether these 
two men actually carried out their com- 
missions is not known. 

In the spring of 1777 Georgia had 
three galleys in service, and later she had a 
fourth. These were named the "Washing- 



1. Jones, History of Georgia, II, 181. 

2. Journals of Continental Congress, July 
5, 1776. 

3. Collections of Georgia Historical So- 
ciety, V, part I ; Proceedings of Georgia Coun- 
cil of Safety, 96, 101-02, 113. 



Navy of the American Revolution 461 

ton," ^'Lee," ''Bulloch/' and ''Congress/' 
This little fleet was placed under the com- 
mand of Commodore Oliver Bowen, and it 
was employed on the Georgia seacoast chiefly 
in conjunction with the army. Under or- 
ders of President Gwinnett three of the gal- 
leys commanded by Commodore Bowen as- 
sisted the army in its unsuccessful expedi- 
tion against East Florida in April and May, 
1777.^ In April, 1778, off Frederica, Geor- 
gia, the "Washington," Captain Hardy. 
*'Lee," Captain Braddock, and "Bulloch," 
Captain Hatcher, with three hundred troops 
on board, captured His Majesty's brigan- 
tine "Hinchinbrooke," 12, the sloop "Re- 
becca," and a brig,^ 

In the campaign around Savannah early 
in 1779 all four galleys were lost. In Janu- 
ary the "Washington" and "Bulloch" were 
stranded near Ossabaw Island on the Geor- 
gia coast, and were burned by their crews, 
to prevent their capture. In March, 1779, 
the "Congress," Captain Campbell, and the 
"Lee," Captain Milligan, engaged near Ya- 
masee Bluff the British galleys "Comet" and 
"Hornet." The Americans, after losing 
three killed, among whom was Captain 
Campbell, and six wounded, were forced to 
abandon their galleys. Out of 104 men on 



1. Jones, History of Georgia, H, 269. 

2. McCall, History of Georgia, II, 137-38; 
Moultrie, Memoirs of American Revolution 
II. 375. 



462 iVflTT of the American Revolution 

board the American galleys the British cap- 
tured but ten/ The occupation of South- 
ern Georgia by the enemy from this time un- 
til the end of the Revolution stopped fur- 
ther naval endeavors on the part of the Pa- 
triot party of the state. 

Georgia had a prize court in operation as 
early as November, 1776. Her constitution 
of February, 1777, provided for the hearing 
of prize cases by special county courts, much 
as in Connecticut.^ 



1. McCall, History of Georgia, 11, 179, 224- 
25. 

2. Jameson, Essays in Constitutional His- 
tory of United States, 10. 



r 



CHAPTER XVII 



THE MINOR NAVIES OF THE NORTHERN 
STATES 

Rhode Island was the first colony to un- 
dertake a defence by means of armed vessels. 
Her initial legislation preceded that of the 
Continental Congress by almost four months. 
During 1775 her coasts and trade were an- 
noyed by the vessels of the enemy. In the 
early summer the conduct of Captain James 
Wallace, the commander of His Majesty's 
frigate ^'Rose/' was especially vexatious 
and insulting. On June 13 Nicholas Cooke, 
Deputy-Governor of Rhode Island, in ac- 
cordance with a resolution of the General 
Assembly, wrote to Wallace demanding the 
immediate restoration of certain captured 
vessels, and especially of two packets be- 
longing to citizens of Providence. The acts 
of Wallace were obviously in the minds of 
the members of the General Assembly, 
when, on June 15, it ordered the Committee 
of Safety to charter and fit out two suitable 
vessels for the defence of the trade of Rhode 
Island. 



464 Navy of the American Revolution 

The General Assembly also appointed a 
committee of three to appraise and hire the 
two vessels. It ordered the larger vessel to 
be equipped with eighty men and ten 4- 
pounders; the smaller vessel was to be 
manned with not more than thirty men. It 
appointed Abraham Whipple commander 
of the larger vessel with the rank and power 
of commodore over both vessels, and named 
his lieutenants, master, and quarter-master. 
Officers were also chosen for the smaller ves- 
sel. The establishment of the little fleet 
was assimilated to that of the land forces of 
the state. Its cruises were to be determined 
by the Lieutenant-General, Brigadier-Gen- 
eral, and the Committee of Safety.^ 

Two sloops, the ^'Katy" and ''Washing- 
ton," were at once chartered. Commodore 
Whipple tells us that on the same day he re- 
ceived his commission, June 15, he captured 
a tender of the frigate ''Rose."^ This was 
the first authorized capture of a naval ves- 
sel of the enemy. During the summer of 
1775 the ''Katy" and ''Washington" cruised 
chiefly in Narragansett Bay for the defence 
of Rhode Island. In August the "Wash- 
ington" was sent outside of the Bay to warn 
incoming vessels laden with powder and 
warlike stores of their danger from British 
craft. It was at this time that Washington 



1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, 
June, 1775. 

2. Staples, Annals of Providence, 265. 



Navy of the American Revolution 465 

proposed that one of the sloops should be 
sent to the Bermudas for powder, which 
military necessity was much needed by his 
army.^ Commodore Whipple, in the ''Katy," 
w^as dispatched on this errand in September. 
Arriving at the Bermudas, Whipple found 
that he had come too late as the powder had 
already been sent to Philadelphia. 

It was while the "Katy" was on this er- 
rand that Governor Cooke, on October 10, 
received orders from the Continental Con- 
gress to send his little fleet to the northward 
to intercept two British transports. The 
"Washington'' was unfit for so large an un- 
dertaking. The "Katy," having arrived 
from the Bermudas, was ordered on No- 
vember 12, 1775, to cruise between Nan- 
tucket Shoals and Halifax. Later her desti- 
nation was changed, and she was directed 
to carry to Philadelphia the seamen which 
Commodore Esek Hopkins had enlisted for 
the Continental service.^ On the arrival of 
the "Katy" in Philadelphia she was taken 
into the Continental service under the name 
of the "Providence." About the same time 
the "Washington" was in all probability 
returned to her owner, as she had become 
more or less unseaworthy. 

Meantime the General Assembly had or- 



1. Force, American Archives, 4th, III, 69 

2. Ibid., 36-37, 461, 653; Collections ot 
Rhode Island Historical Society, VI, 134-35; 
see Chapter I, page 55. 



466 Navy of the American Revolution 

dered the construction of two galleys, to carry 
sixty men, to have fifteen oars on a side, 
and to mount one 18-pounder in the bow.^ 
The work was placed under the direction of 
a superintendent. In January, 1776, the 
General Assembly appointed John Grimes 
commodore of the galleys at a salary of £9 
a month. The galleys were named the 
"Washington" and "Spitfire." They ren- 
dered a variety of services in the Bay, 
cruising in defence of trade, acting as trans- 
ports, and covering landing parties sent 
after forage and supplies.^ In July, 1776, 
they were ordered to proceed to New York 
and to assist in the defence of the Hudson.^ 
It is probable that this detail was not car- 
ried out. By the summer of 1778 they had 
been captured or destroyed by the enemy. 

From June, 1775, until December, 1776, 
naval administration in Rhode Island dur- 
ing the recess of the General Assembly, was 
vested in the Committee of Safety, or Re- 
cess Committee, as it was sometimes called. 
This Committee, as constituted by the ses- 
sion of the General Assembly beginning on 
October 31, 1775, consisted of the Governor 



1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, 
August, 1775. 

2. Providence Gazette, April 20, April 27, 
1776; Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, No- 
vember, December, 1776; Arnold, History of 
Rhode Island, II, 397. 

3. Rhode Island Colonial Records, VII, 
582. 



i 



Navy of the American Revolution 467 

and eighteen members, together with such 
members of the General Assembly as hap- 
pened to be present at the meetings of the 
Committee. Any seven members consti- 
tuted a quorum. The composition of the 
Committee varied slightly at different times. 
On December 13, 1776, a Council of War was 
appointed, with whom naval administra- 
tion was now vested. The Council of War, 
which included the Governor and Lieuten- 
ant-Governor, consisted of nine members, 
any five of whom formed a quorum. In 
May, 1778, a Council of War comprising 
twenty-one members, and representative 
of the whole state was chosen. The Coun- 
cil of War was virtually the Committee of 
Safety under a change of name.^ 

In January, 1776, the General Assembly 
appointed a committee of three to draw up 
a bill establishing a prize court. On March 
18 a bill became a law which established a 
court of justice for the trying of prize cases. 
It was to be presided over by a judge, ap- 
pointed annually. The same act estab- 
lished state privateering. Privateersmen 
were to enter into bond for £2,000 to ob- 
serve the provisions of the act and the in- 
structions of the Governor. They were to 
be commissioned by the Governor. In 
May, 1776, this act was brought into con- 
formity with the resolutions of Congress on 

1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, De- 
cember, 1776. May. 1778. 



4(^8 Xaz-y of the Amcricaji Rcz'oliitiou 

the same subject. Captors were given one- 
half of all armed vessels and one-third of all 
other prizes.^ A list containing the names ' 
of 193 privateers from Rhode Island has 
been compiled.^ 

In June, 1777, the General Assembly un- 
dertook to add two armed vessels to the 
naval force of the state, but for some reason 
its order was not carried out.^ The same 
resolution directed the Council of War to 
procure three merchantmen to be used in 
importing supplies. The ship *^\urora" 
and sloop ' 'Diamond" were two of the vessels 
purchased for commercial purposes. 

For a time Rhode Island relied in part for 
her naval defence upon the two Continental 
frigates, "Providence" and ''Warren," which 
were built at Providence in 1776, and offi- 
cered and manned largely with Rhode Isl- 
and men. The General Assembly and the 
Council of W^ar furthered the work of the 
local naval committee which had charge of 
the construction of the frigates. These two 
ships left Providence early in 1778. During 
1778 and 1779 the state continued to depend 
upon Continental assistance. 

It is recalled that during the summer of 
1778 Washington concerted with the French 

1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, 
March, Mav, 1776. 

2. W. P. Sheffield, Rhode Island Priva- 
teers and Privateersmen. 

3. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, 
June, 1777. 



i 



I 

Navy of the American Revolution 469 

fleet a campaign to drive the British from 
Newport. General SulUvan commanded the 
land forces of the Americans. On June 25, 
1778, Congress directed the Navy Board at 
Boston to build three galleys, or procure 
three suitable vessels, for the defence of the 
Providence, Warren, and Taunton rivers in 
Rhode Island, if upon advising with the 
Rhode Island Council of War and General 
Sullivan, the Navy Board should find such 
measure expedient. At a conference of 
the Navy Board, the Council of War, and 
Sullivan it w^as decided to procure one large 
ship. Such a vessel was obtained by Sulli- 
van, but he was compelled soon to return 
it to its owners.^ With the consent and 
recommendation of the Rhode Island 
authorities, Sullivan, in November, pro- 
cured the *Tigot" galley, and in the 
spring of 1779 the sloop "Argo.^'^ First the 
'Tigot," and later the "Argo,^' was placed 
under the command of Lieutenamt^Colonel 
Silas Talbot, of the Continental army. 

Already Talbot had been twice recom- 
mended by Congress for promotion on ac- 
count of gallant conduct in naval exploits. 
The Rhode Island General Assembly had 

1. Publications of Rhode Island Historical 
Society, VIII, papers of William Vernon and 
Navy Board, 249, 250. 

2. Journals of Rhode Island Council of 
War, July 17, August 24, November 11, 1781; 
Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, Febru- 
ary, 1779. 



470 Navy of the American Revolution 

recognized his bravery in capturing the 
'Tigot" galley off the coast of Rhode Island 
in October, 1778, by voting him a "genteel 
silver-hilted sword /^ As commander of the 
'Tigot" and later of the '^Argo/' Talbot 
was under the orders of Sullivan, and of 
Gates, Sullivan's successor. During the 
summer of 1779 Talbot in the '^Argo," as- 
sisted at times by privateers and the state 
vessels of Massachusetts, captured fifteen 
small prizes.^ As a reward for the conspic- 
uous ability which he showed in this work, 
Congress made him a captain in the Conti- 
nental navy. Early in 1780 the 'Tigot" 
and ''Argo" closed their services under Con- 
tinental and state auspices. 

Rhode Island's last naval enterprise was 
made in 1781. In May of that year the 
General Assembly appointed a committee 
to ''charter a suitable fast sailing Vessel, in 
order to be fitted out as a Cruiser to clear 
the Coast of the piratical Boats that infest 
the same." The committee was voted 
$5,000, and was ordered to man the vessel, 
appoint its officers, and send it to sea. It 
was directed to procure a small vessel of 
thirty to fifty tons burden, mounting four 
3-pounders or 4-pounders. It at once ob- 
tained the sloop "Rover," which it placed 



1. Providence Gazette, August 14, Sep- 
tember 25, 1779; Connecticut Gazette, June 
24, 1779; Pennsylvania Packet, September 
9, 1779. 



i 



Navy of the American Revolution 471 

under the command of Captain Richard 01- 
ney. The '^Rover" served the state but a 
short time, and accompHshed Httle.^ 

New York was led to purchase her first 
armed vessel in order to prevent persons in- 
imical to the liberties of the American Colo- 
nies from supplying the Ministerial army and 
navy with provisions. It was for this pur- 
pose that her Provincial Congress on De- 
cember 20, 1775, appointed a committee of 
two to buy, arm, and fit out a proper vessel 
at a cost not to exceed £600. The com- 
mittee purchased the sloop ^'General Schuy- 
ler,'' and by March, 1776, had the vessel 
ready for service. James Smith, who in 
the summer of 1775 had served as ''Commo- 
dore on the Lakes," that is. Lakes Cham- 
plain and George, was appointed commander 
of the ''General Schuyler." In March the 
Provincial Congress ordered the sloop "Bish- 
op Landaff" to be fitted out.^ 

On March 11, 1776, the Provincial Con- 
gress appointed five of its members, all 
from New York, a Marine Committee. It 
empowered this Committee "to take such 
measures, and give such directions, and em- 
ploy such persons for the protection or ad- 
vantage of trade as they may think proper, 
useful, or necessary." The Marine Com- 



1. Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, 
May and October, 1781. 

2. Journals of New York Provincial Con- 
gress, December 20, 1775, March 9, 1776. 



472 Navy of the American Revolution 

mittee was a permanent navy board vested 
with the management and direction of the 
naval affairs of the state. Three of its 
members formed a quorum. Thomas Ran- 
dall was its chairman. It was authorized to 
keep secret such matters as it saw fit. It 
reported to the Provincial Congress, when 
the Congress was in session, and at other 
times to the Committee of Safety. It was 
directed to apply to the Provincial Congress 
when in need of advice.^ In March and 
April it purchased the sloop ''Montgomery," 
and the schooner ''General Putnam," and 
sold the "Bishop Landaff."^ 

On April 17 the New York Committee of 
Safety issued commissions to Captain Wil- 
liam Rodgers of the "Montgomery," Cap- 
tain James Smith of the "General Schuy- 
ler," and Captain Thomas Cregier of the 
"General Putnam." Rather singularly, 
these captains executed bonds in favor of 
John Hancock, President of the Continental 
Congress, and were given the commissions 
of Continental privateers. The naval es- 
tablishment of New York was a mixed one. 
Her fleet was governed by the Continental 
naval rules and regulations. The enlisting 
contract of the "Montgomery" reads at 
points as if the vessel belonged to the Con- 



1. Journals of New York Provincial Con- 
gress, March 11, 1776. 

2. Journals of New York Committee of 
Safety, April 25, 1776. 



Navy of the American Revolution 473 

tinental Congress: ''The said William Rog- 
ers, for and in behalf of himself and the said 
Thirteen Colonies of North America, doth 
hereby covenant and agree to and with said 
officers, seamen, and marines" to advance 
a month's wages. In sharing prizes, in 
granting bounties to wounded soldiers, and 
in rewarding exceptional merit, the contract 
followed the naval regulations of the Conti- 
nental Congress.^ On the other hand, the 
three vessels were owned, fitted out, offi- 
.cered, and manned by New York, which 
state directed their cruises, and paid their 
officers and seamen. This mixed estab- 
lishment may in part be explained by the 
fact that at first New York's intention was 
to have Congress take her vessels into the 
Continental service.^ 

On the evacuation of Boston by the Brit- 
ish on March 17, 1776, Washington at once 
proceeded to New York, whither, it is recol- 
lected, the scene of war soon shifted. In 
April Washington asked for the loan of the 
New York vessels to assist in the defence 
of New York city. After some disagree- 
ment as to the terms upon which he 
should receive them, the ''General Put- 
nam" and the "General Schuyler" were 



1. Journals of New York Committee of 
Safety, April l9, 1776; Fernow, New York 
in Revolution, 530-33. 

2. Journals of New York Provincial Con- 
gress, January 22, 1776. 



474 Navy of the American Revolution 

turned over to him.^ Hereafter the state 
seems not to have had the direction of the 
''General Schuyler/' In October, 1776, a 
mutiny having occurred on board the ''Gen- 
eral Putnam," the New York Committee of 
Safety ordered this vessel to be sold.^ 

New York's fleet captured some eight or 
ten prizes. It cruised chiefly in the waters 
surrounding Long Island. The "Montgom- 
ery" had best success. On April 19, 1776, the 
Marine Committee reported to the Committee 
of Safety a draft of instructions for Captain 
Rodgers. He was ordered to cruise between 
Sandy Hook and Cape May, or from Sandy 
Hook to the east end of Long Island, and 
he was cautioned to always keep "some in- 
let under your lee, so that you may secure 
a retreat from a superior force. "^ Prizes 
were to be sent to some place of safety in 
the United Colonies. The "Montgomery" 
cruised in this general region until June, 
1777; in July she was sold for £3,550. She 
captured several merchantmen, which were 
libeled in the admiralty courts of Rhode Isl- 
and, Connecticut, and Maryland. In the 
condemning and selling of these prizes, 
New York's interests were attended to by 
agents appointed for the purpose. The 



1. Journals, of New York. Committee of 
Safety, April 24, May 10, 1776. 

2. Ibid., September 21, September 24, 
October 7, 1776. 

3. Ibid., April 19, 1776. 



Navy of the American Revolution 475 

"Montgomery's" most valuable prize was the 
schooner "Hannah/' libeled in Baltimore, 
which, with her cargo of clothing, cloths, 
and provisions, sold for £11,281. Another 
prize, the "Minerva," with a cargo of salt, 
was tried by the court at the same time with 
the "Hannah," and was freed; whereupon, 
Francis Lewis, a delegate of New York to 
the Continental Congress, which was then 
in session in Baltimore, appealed the case of 
the "Minerva" to Congress.^ 

In August, 1776, the Secret Committee, 
which was assisting in the defence of the 
Hudson, was fitting out two small armed 
sloops, the "Camden" and "Hudson. "^ As 
late as January, 1777, the Committee of 
Safety was planning for a naval armament; 
orders were then given for cutting the tim- 
bers for a 74-gun ship.^ The permanent oc- 
cupation of New York city by the British 
stopped New York's naval enterprises on 
state account. She continued, however, to 
grant a few privateering commissions, until 
the end of the war. In passing, one should 
mention that in 1776 New York contributed 
officers, seamen, and naval supplies to Ar- 
nold's campaign on lakes Champlain and 

1. Journals of New York Committee of 
Safety, February 13, 1777; Journals of New 
York Provincial Congress, April 1, 1777. 

2. Journals of New York Provincial Con- 
gress, August 16, 1776. 

3. Journals of New York Committee of 
Safety, January 15, 1777. 



4/6 Navy of the American Revolution 

George. By the terms of New York's Con- 
stitution of 1777 the Governor was **com- 
mander-in-chief of all the militia and ad- 
miral of the navy of this state." The Con- 
stitution implied that there was to be a 
Court of Admiralty, although it did not 
make definite provision for such court. ^ 

New Hampshire's only naval undertaking 
was her participation, at the suggestion of 
Massachusetts, in the Penobscot expedition 
of July, 1779. She contributed to the ill- 
starred fleet the ^'Hampden," 22, Captain 
Titus Salter, which vessel was captured by 
the British.2 On July 3, 1776, New 
Hampshire passed an act '*to encourage the 
fixing out of Armed Vessels to defend the 
seacoast of America, and to cruise on the en- 
emies of the United Colonies, as also for 
erecting a court to try and condemn all 
Ships and other Vessels." This act was mod- 
eled on similar acts of Massachusetts. It 
established state privateering. A ''Court 
Maritime," consisting of one judge, was 
erected at Portsmouth to try cases of cap- 
ture. Salvage was prescribed in accordance 

\. New York Constitution of 1777. See 
Carson, Supreme Court of United States, p. 45, 
for further references to the admiralty legisla- 
tion of New York. 

2. New Hampshire Archives, VIII, 106, 
186, 195. In March, 1776, the New Hamp- 
shire House of Representatives appointed a 
committee of three to look out for an armed 
vessel to guard the coast. It is believed that 
no vessel was procured. 



Navy of the American Revolution 477 

with the proportions fixed by the Conti- 
nental Congress. In cases of prizes cap- 
tured by a Continental vessel, appeals lay 
from the Court Maritime to the Continental 
Congress.^ 

In July, 1776, a Committee of Newark, 
New Jersey, requested the New Jersey Pro- 
vincial Congress to build four ''gondolas," 
or row-galleys, to be mounted with can- 
non, and to ply between the mouths of the 
Passaic and Hackensack rivers and the 
town of Perth Amboy. The Provincial 
Congress referred the proposition to a com- 
mittee of four. It finally ended the busi- 
ness by referring the report of this commit- 
tee to the Continental Congress.^ 

Until October 5, 1776, when New Jersey 
passed an act establishing an admiralty 
court, her Provincial Congress decided prize 
cases. So early as February 15, 1776, a 
committee of the Provincial Congress, which 
had been appointed to draft an ordinance 
for erecting a Court of Admiralty, reported 
that it had consulted William Livingston, 
one of the New Jersey delegates to the Con- 
tinental Congress, on the subject, and had 
proposed to him, whether it would not be of 
manifest advantage to the Colonies if ''Con- 



1. Force, American Archives, 5th, I, 
90-96. 

2. Minutes of Provincial Congress and 
Council of Safety of New Jersey, 1775-1776, 
510, 520, 525, 528. 



47 8 Navy of the American Revolution 

gress should, by one general ordinance, in- 
stitute the powers and mode of erecting a 
Court of Admiralty to be adopted by all the 
Colonies." Livingston agreed to take the 
first opportunity for proposing the matter 
to Congress.^ Nothing came of the recom- 
mendation. 



1. Minutes of Provincial Congress and 
Council of Safety of New Jersey, 1775-1776 
370-71. 396. 479. 



I 



APPENDICES 



APPENDIX A 

A BIBLIOGRAPHY 



THE CONTINENTAL NAVY 



MANUSCRIPT SOURCES 

Adams, John. Letters for 1775 and 1776, de- 
posited for the present by Charles Francis 
Adams with the Massachusetts Historical 
Society, Boston. 

A few letters are valuable for the early 
history of the Continental Navy. 
Continental Congress. Manuscript Journals. 
Supplements and corrects the printed 
journals. 
Continental Congress. Records and Papers, 
formerly found in the Bureau of Rolls and 
Library, Department of State, Washington; 
but now in most part in the Library of Con- 
gress, Division of Manuscripts. There are 
many volumes o^ these documents. Most of 
the material relating to the navy is found in 
the following volumes: 
No. 28, 1 vol.. Reports of committees of 

Congress on naval affairs, 1776-1786. 
No. 37, 1 vol.. Reports of Marine Commit- 
tee and Board of Admiralty, 1776-1780. 



482 Bibliography 



No. 50, 1 vol., Letters of Oliver Pollock, 

Commercial Agent at New Orleans, to 

President and to committees of Congress, 

1776-1782. 

No. 58, 1 vol., Letters and Papers of John 

Hancock. 
No. 78, 24 vols.. Letters to President of Con- 
gress. 
No. 90, 1 vol., Letters of the commercial 
agents at Martinique to President of 
Congress. 
No. 137, 3 vols.. Letters and Reports of 

Robert Morris, Agent of Marine. 
No. 138, 3 vols.. Reports of the Board of 

Treasury, 1784-1789. 
Nos. 82-96, 132, 168, and 193. 

The Records and Papers of the Conti- 
nental Congress are especially valuable 
for the years from 1780 to 1783. They 
contain many important letters of John 
Paul Jones. The letters of Pollock give a 
full account of his services at New Orleans. 
Deane, Silas. Papers in the library of the 
Connecticut Historical Society, Hartford. 
A few of these papers relate to the navy. 
Force Transcripts. These are copies of many 
of the Records and Papers of the Continent- 
al Congress, made by Peter Force, and now 
in the possession of the Library of Congress, 
Division of Manuscripts. 

The copying is accurately done. The 
pagination often differs from that of the 
originals. 
Hopkins, Esek. Letters and papers, in the li- 
brary of the Rhode Island Historical Society, 
Providence. 

Quite valuable for 1775, 1776, and 1777. 
The best of them have been printed in 
Edward Field's Esek Hopkins. 
Jones, John Pavil. Manuscripts, in the Divi- 



Bibliography 483 



sion of Manuscripts, Library of Congress. 
Have been excellently catalogued by C. H. 
Lincoln in Calendar of John Paul Jones 
Manuscripts. 

An important original source for the naval 
history of the Revolution. A number of 
the most important manuscripts, how- - 
ever, have been published, notably in 
Sands's Life and Correspondence of John 
Paul Jones. 
Marine Committee Letter Book. Letters of 
the Marine Committee and the Board of Ad- 
miralty, in the Division of Manuscripts, Li- 
brary of Congress. 

Quite the most important manuscript 
source for the history of the Continental 
navy from 1776 to 1780. Contains 217 
pages, folio, and 505 letters. They are 
copies of the originals. Of these letters, 
371 were written by the Marine Committee 
between August 22, 1776, and November 
20, 1779; and 134 by the Board of Ad- 
miralty between December. 10, 1779, and 
September 19, 1780. Eighty-six letters 
are addressed to the Navy Board at Bos- 
ton. Hitherto the Marine Committee Let- 
ter Book has been little used. 
Tucker, Samuel. Papers, in the Harvard Li- 
brary, Cambridge. Valuable for the career 
of Samuel Tucker, a captain in the Continent- 
al navy. The best of the papers have been 
published by J. H. Sheppard in his Life of 
Samuel Tucker, 1868. (See entry under 
Sheppard.) 
Miscellaneous Manuscripts, Division of Manu- 
scripts, Library of Congress 

Of noteworthy importance is a list of 
commissioned officers in the Continental 
navy, far more complete than any yet 
published. 



484 Bihliography 



PRINTED SOURCES 

Adams, John. Works, 10 vols. Boston, 
1856. 

Almost the only source for the debates in 
Congress on naval affairs in the fall of 
1775. His Notes on Debates are more 
reliable than his Autobiography. 
Appleton. Cyclopedia of American Biog- 
raphy. 7 vols. New York, 1898-1900. 
Contains a little information of interest 
to students of naval history. 
Annual Register for 1775-1783. London. 

Of slight value for naval history. 
Bancroft, George. History of the United 
States. 6 vols New York, 1884-85. 
A few references to naval history. 
Barney, Mary. Memoirs of Commodore Josh- 
ua Barney. Boston, 1832, 
Not satisfactory. 
Beatson, Robert. Naval and Military Mem- 
oirs of Great Britain, 1727-1783. London, 
1804. 

Contains accounts of some of the import- 
ant naval engagements of the Revolu- 
tion. 
Bigelow, John. Works of Benjamin Frank- 
lin. 10 vols. New York, 1887-88. 

Contains valuable original material for 
Franklin's naval services in Paris. 
Bolton, C. K. Private Soldier under Wash- 
ington, New York, 1902. 

A few references to the navy. 
Boston Gazette for 1775-1783. Boston. 

Of great value for a history of the move- 
ments of the Continental vessels. In its 
advertisements of libeled prizes, one of 
the very best sources for the work of the 
Massachusetts privateers. 
British Marine Encyclopedia, in Hogg's Naval 
Magazine for 1801. London. 



Bibliography 485 



Excellent for definitions of naval terms 
used in the British navy. 

Buell, A. C. Paul Jones, Founder of the 
American Navy. 2 vols. New York, 1900. 
Very interesting; attractive style. Con- 
tains many inaccuracies. Chapter II, 
Volume I, entitled, Founding of the Ameri- 
can Navy, is in no small part fiction. 

Canadian Archives, report on, for 1895. Ot- 
tawa. 

Under the subject Prince Edward Island, 
will be found references to Broughton and 
Selman's expedition in 1775. 

Carson, H. L. Supreme Court of the United 
States. Philadelphia, 1902. 

Contains a brief account of the prize 
courts of the Revolution. 

Caulkins, Frances M. History of New Lond- 
on, Connecticut. New London, 1852. 

A few valuable references to the Continen- 
tal navy. 

Clark, Thomas. Naval History of the United 
States. Philadelphia, 1814. 

The earliest history of the United States 
navy. Has considerable merit. Gives 
sources of his information. His inter- 
views with naval officers constitute origi- 
nal material. 

Clowes, W. L. Royal Navy. 7 vols, Bos- 
ton and London, 1897-1903. 

Chapter XXXI, Volume III, and Chapter I, 
Volume IV, are important sources for the 
engagements of Continental vessels with 
vessels of the Royal Navy. Scientific 
treatment. Some sources have been used 
which are not accessible in America. The 
most important contribution to the his- 
tory of the Continental navy since Coop- 
er's naval history, written in 1839. 

Connecticut Colonial Records for 1775-1776; 
Connecticut State Records for 1776-1780. 
Hartford, 1890, 1894-95. 



486 Bibliography 



Contain references to the Continental 
vessels built in Connecticut. 

Connecticut Gazette for 1775-1783. New 
London. 

Contains important bits of information 
relating to the movements of the Conti- 
nental vessels. 

Connecticut Historical Society Collections, 
vol. VIII. Hartford, 1901. 

Contains rolls of the Connecticut compa- 
nies who served in the navy on Lake 
Champlain. 

Continental Congress, Journals of, for 1775- 
1788. 13 vols. Philadelphia, 1777-88. 
The most valuable and extensive source 
for the history of naval legislation and ad- 
ministration during the Revolution. The 
edition of W. C. Ford, now being pub- 
lished by the Library of Congress, super- 
sedes previous editions. 

Continental Congress, Secret Journals, for 
1775-1788. 4 vols. ^ Boston, 1821. 

Contributes some information on the work 
of naval agents abroad. 

Continental Journal and Weekly Advertiser 
for 1776-1783. Boston. 

Supplements the information found in the 
•Boston Gazette. 

Cooper, James Fenimore. History of the Navy 
of the United States of America. London, 
1839. 

Several editions of this work have been 
issued. The first part treats of the Con- 
tinental navy. This varies little in the dif- 
ferent editions. Clear and interesting 
style. The most satisfactory account of 
the engagements of the Continental navy. 
Treats of its fights with merchantmen and 
privateers, as well as with the vessels of 
the Royal Navy. More complete than 
Clowes, but not so scientific. 



Bibliography 487 



Deane Papers. Collections of the New York 
Historical Society. 5 vols. New York, 
1886-90. 

Valuable for the naval services of Silas 
Deane in France. 
Emmons, Lieutenant G. F. Navy of the 
United States. Washington, 1853. 

Names of the Continental vessels and 
their prizes arranged in tables. Treat- 
ment statistical. Valuable, but far from 
complete. Privateers of the Revolution 
similarly treated. 
Field, Edward. Esek Hopkins. Providence, 
1898. 

Valuable. Prints many important Hop- 
kins papers. 
Field, Edward. State of Rhode Island and 
Providence Plantations. 3 vols. Boston 
and Syracuse. 

Contains some additional information re- 
lating to the early life of Esek Hopkins. 
Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols. 
Folio. Washington, 1837-53. 

A source of very great value for naval his- 
tory during 1775 and 1776. Prints the 
chief public records for these years, to- 
gether with important letters and mis- 
cellaneous papers. 
Ford, W. C. Writings of George Washington. 
14 vols. New York and London, 1889-93. 
One of the chief sources for the history of 
Washington's fleets. 
Ford, W. C. Letters of William Lee. 3 vols. 
Brooklyn, 1891. 

Valuable for the work of the commercial 
agents in France. 
Goldsborough's Naval Chronicle. Washing- 
ton, 1824. 
Grifhn, M. L J. Commodore John Barry, 
Philadelphia, 1903. 

Especially valuable for the numerous doc- 
uments which are printed. 



488 Bibliography 



Hale, Edward Everett and Edward Everett, jr. 
Franklin in France. 2 vols. Boston, 1887. 
Prints many documents. Chapter XI, 
American Prisoners, Chapter XVI, Priva- 
teers form Dunkirk, and Chapter XVII, 
Captain Landais, Volume I, are of special 
interest to students of naval history. 
Hamerslv, L. R. Naval Encyclopedia. Phila- 
delphia, 1881. 
Suggestive. 
Hamilton, J. C. Works of Alexander Hamil- 
ton. 7 vols. New York, 1850-51. 

Contains Hamilton's views on single- 
headed executives. 
Hatch, L. C. Administration of the Ameri- 
can Revolutionary Army, Harvard Histori- 
cal Studies, X. New York and London, 
1904. 

Suggestive for the Continental navy. 
Independent Chronicle and Universal Adver- 
tiser for 1775-1783, Boston. 

Supplements the Boston Gazette. 
Ingraham, E. D. Papers relating to Silas 
Deane. Philadelphia, 1855-57. 

Relate to his controversy with Congress. 
Jameson, J. F. Essays in the Constitutional 
History of the United States. Baltimore, 
1886. 

Chapter I gives a good account of the Con- 
tinental prize courts. Chapter II treats of 
the administrative organs of the Conti- 
nental Congress. Scientific. 
Johnston's Correspondence and Public Papers 
of John Jay. 4 vols. New York, 1890-93. 
Volume I contains a valuable letter of 
Jay's relating to naval administration. 
Jones, C. H. Gustavus Conyngham. Phila- 
delphia, 1903. 

A brief, but good account. 
King's Regulations and Admiralty Instruc- 
tions for 1772. London. 



Bibliography 489 



Gives the rules and regulations of the 
Royal Navy at the opening of the Revolu- 
tion. 
Lincoln, C. H. Calendar, John Paul Jones 
Manuscripts Washington, 1903. 

Excellent catalogue and digest of the 
Jones manuscripts in the Library of Con- 
gress. Dr. Lincoln's purpose is to enlarge 
his calendar so as to include the additional 
Jones material which is found in the Rec- 
ords and Papers of the Continental Con- 
gress. 
Lossing, B. J. Field-Book of the American 
Revolution. 2 vols. New York, 1851-52. 
Slight naval information. 
Maclay, E. S. History of the United States 
Navy. 2 vols. New York, 1894. 

Narrative of the Continental navy some- 
what popular. 
Massachusetts Historical Society Collections. 
Boston, 1806- . 

Brief references to the Continental navy. 
New England Historical and Genealogical Reg- 
ister for 1865. Boston. 

Contains a list of prisoners confined at 
Mill prison, Plymouth, during the Revo- 
lution. 
New Hampshire Gazette for 1775-1783. Ports- 
mouth. 

Contains information concerning the Con- 
tinental vessels which were built in New 
Hampshire, or which arrived at Ports- 
mouth. 
New London County Historical Society, Rec- 
ords and Papers. Volume L New London, 
1890-94. 

Gives a most excellent account of the 
fight between the Continental frigate 
"Trumbull" and the Liverpool privateer 
"Watt." 
Outlook, January 3, 1903. Tragedy of the 
Lost Commission by James Barnes. 



490 Bibliography 



A brief, but excellent, account of the ex- 
ploits of Captain Gustavus Conyngham. 
Pennsylvania Archives, 1st Ser. 12 vols, 
Philadelphia, 1852-56. 

Of special value for the movements of the 
Continental vessels in the Delaware river 
and bay. 
Pennsylvania Packet for 1775-1783. Phila- 
delphia. 

Valuable for the movements of the Conti- 
nental vessels and the Pennsylvania 
privateers. The prizes which were sent 
into Philadelphia are advertised in its col- 
umns. 
Providence Gazette for 1775-1783. Provi- 
dence. 

Valuable for Continental vessels in 1775 
and 1776. Contains names of prizes. 
Rhode Island Historical Society Publications, 
VIII. Providence, 1900. Papers of William 
Vernon and the Navy Board. 

A valuable source of information for the 
work of the Navy Board at Boston. A 
number of important letters and docu- 
ments are printed. 
Root, M. P. Chapter Sketches of Connecti- 
cut Daughters of the American Revolution. 
New Haven, 1901. 

Contains the best account of the life of 
Nathaniel Shaw, jr., naval agent at New 
London. 
Royal Navy, List of. New York, 1782. 
Sands, R. Life and Correspondence of John 
Paul Jones. New York, 1830. 
Valuable reprints. 
Scribner's Magazine for 1898. New York. 
John Paul Jones in the American Revolution, 
by Captain A. T. Mahan. 

Contains a technical account of the fight 
between the "Bon Homme Richard" and 
the "Serapis. " 



Bibliography 491 



Sheppard, J. H. Commodore Samuel Tucker. 
Boston, 1868. 

A good account of Tucker's life. Re- 
prints the best of the Tucker papers 
found in the Harvard Library. 
Sherburne, J. H. Life of John Paul Jones. 
New York, 1825, 1851. 
A fair account. 
Sparks, Jared. American Biography, 2nd Ser. 
Vol. IX. Gammell's Life of Samuel Ward. 
Boston, 1846. 

Contains a bit of important information 
with reference to the founding of the navy. 
Sparks, Jared. Gouverneur Morris. 3 vols. 
Boston, 1832. 

Volume I contains Morris's description of 
an ideal secretary of the navy. 
Spears, J. R. History of Our Navy. 5 vols. 
New York, 1897-99. 

The account of the Continental navy is 
somewhat popular. 
Staples, W. R. Annals of Providence. Prov- 
idence, 1843. 

Of some value for 1775 and 1776. 
Stevens's Facsimiles. 24 portfolios. London, 
1889-95. 

Valuable for the diplomatic relations be- 
tween England and France for 1776 and 
1777, and for the movements of American 
vessels in European waters during these 
years. . 
Sumner, W. G. Financier and Finances of the 
American Revolution. 2 vols. New York, 
1891. 

Gives a few facts about Morris's career as 
Agent of Marine. 
Town, Ithiel. Some Details of the American 
Revolution. New York, 1835. 
Of slight value for naval history. 
Waite, H. E. Origin of the American Navv. 
Boston, 1890. 



492 Bibliography 



Contains letters written by John Adams, 
Elbridge Gerry, and John Langton in 
1813. These relate chiefly to the services 
of Washington's fleet at Boston. 
Wells, W. V. Life and Public Services of 
Samuel Adams, 3 vols. Boston, 1865. 
Adds to our knowledge of Samuel Adams 
as member of the Marine Committee. 
Wharton, Francis. Revolutionary Diplomatic 
Correspondence, 1775-1783. 6 vols. Wash- 
ington, 1889. 

Of primary importance for the history of 
the naval services of American represent- 
atives in foreign countries. 
Williams, Gomer. Liverpool Privateers. Liv- 
erpool, 1897. 

Valuable for the sea fights of the Liver- 
pool privateers. 
Winsor, Justin. Narrative and Critical His- 
tory of the United States. 8 vols. Boston 
and New York, 1884-89 . 

Volume VI contains a history of the Revo- 
lutionary navy by E. E. Hale. 
Brief and suggestive. 



i 



THE STATE NAVIES 

THE NAVY OF MASSACHUSETTS 

Amory's James Sullivan. 2 vols. Boston, 
1859. 

Throws some light upon Massachusetts's 
prize courts. 
Austin's Elbridge Gerry. 2 vols. Boston, 
1828-29. 

Contains information in respect to prize 
courts. 
Boston Gazette for 1775-1783. Boston. 

Of the highest value for the cruises, en- 
gagements, and prizes of the Massachus- 
etts navy. 
Clowes. W. L. Royal Navy. 7 vols. Bos- 
ton and London, 1897-1903. 

Volume IV contains an account of the na- 
val battle at the mouth of. the Penobscot. 
Continental Journal and Weekly Advertiser 
for 1775-1783. Boston. 

Supplements the Boston Gazette. 
Goodell, Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts. 
5 vols. 1869-86. 

Volume V contains the legislation of Mas- 
sachusetts with reference to prize courts. 
The notes to the laws are a valuable guide 
to the sources of the events which led to 
the passage of the laws. 
Maclay, E. S. History of American Privateer- 
ing. New York, 1899. 

Of value for the Revolutionary private ers 
of Massachusetts. 



494 Bibliography 



Massachusetts Historical Society Collections. 
67 vols. Boston, 1792-1894. 

Contains references to the Penobscot ex- 
pedition. 

Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings. 
30 vols. Boston, 1859-94. 

Contains information upon the Penobscot 
expedition. 

Massachusetts, Journals of the House of Rep- 
resentatives for 1775-1783. 

Contemporaneous print. Incomplete. 
The journals found in the state library 
may be supplemented by those found in 
the library of the Boston Athenaeum. 

Massachusetts, Records of the Council for 
1775-1776. 

Are printed in part in Force's American 
Archives. 

Massachusetts, Journals of the Third Provin- 
cial Convention, 1775. 

Are printed in Force's American Arch- 
ives. The chief sources for the early civil 
history of the Massachusetts navy are 
the Journals of the Third Provincial Con- 
vention, Journals of the House, Records 
of the Council, and the Resolves of the 
General Court. 

Massachusetts, Records of the General Court 
for 1775-1783. MSS. 

Supplements the Journals and the Re- 
solves. 

Massachusetts Resolves, for 1775-1783. 

Contemporaneous print. A most valu- 
able source. Most of the naval legisla- 
tion of Massachusetts was passed in the 
form of Resolves, and not Laws. 

Massachusetts Revolutionary Archives, MSS. 
A very extensive and valuable source. 
Manv volumes contain material relating 
to the navy. Volumes XXXIX, XL, and 
XLIV have the greatest value. They con- 
tain the rolls of naval vessels, letters of of- 



J 



'ibliography 495 



ficers, and miscellaneous papers. Vol- 
ume CXLV has many documents relating 
to the Penobscot expedition. The Arch- 
ives are rich in material relating to pri- 
vateers. The Board of War Letters, 
Board of War Minutes, and Board of War 
Orders contain much naval material. An 
Index compiled by Justin Winsor affords 
a valuable key to the Archives. 

Pickering and Upham's Timothy Pickering. 
4 vols. Boston, 1867, 1874. 
Of value for the work of the Massachu- 
setts prize courts. 

Virginia Gazette for 1779. Williamsburg. 
Prints a valuable letter about Massachu- 
setts privateers. 

Wej^mouth Historical Society Publications. 
2 vols. Boston, 1881-85. 

Volume I gives the best account of the 
Penobscot expedition, and prints the 
original Journal of General Solomon Lovell 
kept on the expedition. 

Winsor, Justin. Narrative and Critical His- 
tory of the United States. 8 vols. Boston 
and New York, 1884-89. 

Article on the Revolutionary navy by 
E. E. Hale, in Volume VI, contains infor- 
mation on the Massachusetts navy. Val- 
uable bibliography. 

Works of John Adams. 10 vols. Boston, 
1856. 

Gives John Adams's opinion of the Massa- 
chusetts statute establishing privateer- 
ing. 

THE NAVY OF CONNECTICUT 

Caulkins, Frances M. History of Norwich. 
Norwich, 1845. 

Contains information relative to the naval 
part which Norwich and Norwich men 
played in the Revolution. 



496 Bibliography 



Connecticut Revolutionary Archives. MSS. 
Contains much miscellaneous informa- 
tion relating to the Connecticut navy. 
Volumes VI 1 1 and I X contain valuable ma- 
terial concerning the prizes captured by 
Connecticut vessels. 

Connecticut Colonial Records for 1775-1776. 
Hartford, 1890. 

Valuable for the beginnings of the Con- 
necticut navy. 

Connecticut Gazette for 1 775-1779. New Lon- 
don. 

The best newspaper for naval news in the 
state. Captured prizes are advertised 
in its columns. 

Connecticut Historical Society Collections. 
8 vols. Hartford, 1860-1901. 

Volume II contains a description of 
Bushnell's submarine boat. 

Connecticut in the Revolution. Hartford, 
1889. 

Of slight naval value. 

Connecticut Journal for 1775-1779. New 
Haven. 

Supplements the Connecticut Gazette in a 
few particulars, but contains much less 
news. 

Connecticut State Records, 1776-1779. 2 
vols. Hartford, 1894-95. 

Of great value for the years covered. 

Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols. 
Folio. Washington, 1837-53. 

Contains miscellaneous information relat- 
ing to the Connecticut navy. 

Ford, W. C. Writings of George Washington. 
14 vols. New York and London, 1889-93. 
Volume X contains Washington's account 
of Bushnell's submarine boat. 

Hartford Courant for 1775-1779. ^ Hartford. 
For naval news, the newspaper in the state 
next in importance to the Connecticut 
Gazette. 



Bibliography 497 



New London County Historical Society. Rec- 
ords and Papers. Volume I. New Lon- 
don, 1890-94. 

Valuable. Contains a fair account of the 
Connecticut navy, and a list of Connecti- 
cut privateers. 
Wharton, Francis. Revolutionary Diplomat- 
ic Correspondence. 6 vols. Washington, 
1889. 

Volume II has a reference to the voyage 
of the "Spy" to France in 1778. 

THE NAVY OF PENNSYLVANIA 

Almon's Remembrancer for 1778. London. 
Valuable for an account of the British raid 
to the north of Philadelphia in May, 1778. 
Bioren, Laws of Pennsylvania. 4 vols. Phil- 
adelphia, 1810. 

Contains statutes relating to the estab- 
lishment of prize courts. 
Barney, Mary. Memoirs of Commodore Bar- 
ney. Boston, 1832. 

Of value for a history of the "Hyder 
Ally." . 

Jameson, J. F. Essays in the Constitutional 
History of the United States. Baltimore, 
1886. 

Chapter _ I, Predecessor of the Supreme 

Court, gives an excellent account of the 

capture of the sloop "Active" by the brig 

"Convention." 

Pennsylvania Archives. 1st and 2nd Ser. 31 

vols. Philadelphia and Harrisburg, 1852- 

90. 

The most important source after the Co- 
lonial records. Volume I of the second 
series contains the minutes of the Penn- 
sylvania Navy Board, a brief historical 
account of the navy, and a list of Pennsyl- 
vania privateers. 



498 Bihliography 



Pennsylvania Colonial Records. 16 vols. 
Philadelphia, 1852-53. 

A source of great value for the history of 
the Pennsylvania navy. 
Pennsylvania Journal and Weekly Advertiser 
for 1775-1783. Philadelphia. 

Supplements the Pennsylvania Packet. 
Pennsylvania Packet for 1775-1783. Phila- 
delphia. 

Valuable for the prizes captured by Penn- 
sylvania naval vessels and by privateers. 
Not printed while the British occupied 
Philadelphia. 
Scharf and Westcott. History of Pennsyl- 
vania. 3 vols, Philadelphia, 1884. 
Contains bits of naval information. 
Wallace, J. W. Colonel William Bradford. 
Philadelphia, 1884. 

Valuable for the naval campaigns around 
Philadelphia. 

THE NAVY OF VIRGINIA 

Almon's Remembrancer for 1779 and 1781. 
London. 

Contains original material for the raids into 
Virginia of Matthews and Collier, and of 
Arnold and Phillips. 
Calendar of Virginia State Papers. 10 vols. 
Richmond, 1875-92. 

Volumes I-III throw light upon the vears 
1780-1783. Volume VIII, pages 75-240, 
prints the Journals of the Committee of 
Safety of Virginia, February 7 to July 5, 
1776. 
Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols 
Folio. Washington, 1837-53. 
Prints important state records. 
Ford, W. C. Writings of Jefferson. 10 vols. 
New York and London, 1892-99. 

Of value for Jefferson's naval services 
while governor of Virginia. 



I 



Bibliography 499 



Hening's Statutes of Virginia. 13 vols. Phil- 
adelphia and New York, 1823. 

A most important source for naval legis- 
lation and administration in Virginia. 
Lull, E. P. History of the United States Navy 
yard at Gosport, Virginia. Washington, 
1874. 

Gives the early history of the navy yard 
at Norfolk. 
Maryland Archives, 21 vols. Baltimore, 
1883-1901. 

Contains information about Commodore 
Boucher of the Virginia navy. 
North Carolina Records. 18 vols. Raleigh, 
1886-1900. 

Contains information upon the raid of 
Matthews and Collier. 
Rowland, K. M. George Mason. 2 vols. New 
York, 1892. 

Volume I is valuable for Virginia's "Po- 
tomac river fleet." 
Southern Literary Messenger for 1857. Rich- 
mond. 

Contains a series of valuable articles en- 
titled the "Virginia Navy of the Revolu- 
tion." A good account of the Virginia 
navy. Somewhat extravagant in tone. 
Popular rather than scientific. 
Virginia Archives, Richmond. Letter Book 
of Governor Thomas Jefferson; Letter Book 
of Governor Benjamin Harrison. MSS. 
Contain bits of naval information. 
Virginia Archives, Richmond. Journals of 
the Virginia Navy Board. MSS. 

A valuable source for both the civil and 
military history of the navy. 
Virginia Archives, Richmond. Virginia State 
Navy Papers. 2 vols. MSS. 

An important original source. Contains 
much information relative to the differ- 
ent vessels of the navy. 



500 Bibliography 



Virginia Gazette for 1775-1779. Williams- 
burg. 

Not complete files. Those in the Library 
of the Virginia Historical Society may be 
supplemented by those in the Virginia 
State Library. Of some value for the 
cruises of the Virginia fleet. 

Virginia Historical Register. 6 vols. Rich- 
mond, 1848-53. 

Contains some important bits of naval in- 
formation. 



THE NAVY OF SOUTH CAROLINA 

Almon's Remembrancer for 1780. London. 
Valuable for the naval defence of Charles- 
ton, 1779-1780. 
Clowes, W. L. Royal Navy. 7 vols. Bos- 
ton and London, 1897-1903. 

Gives good accounts of the cruise of the 
"Randolph" in 1778, and the capture of 
the "South Carolina" in 1782. 
Connecticut Gazette for 1782, New London. 
Reports the capture of the Bahamas by 
the Spaniards and Commodore Gillon. 
Cooper's Statutes of South Carolina. 10 vols. 
Columbia, 1836-41. 

Valuable for naval legislation. 
Deane Papers. Collections of the New York 
Historical Society. 5 vols. New York, 
1886-90. 

Serviceable for Gillon 's movements in 
Europe. 
Drayton, W. H. Memoirs of the American 
Revolution. 2 vols. Charleston, 1821. 
Throws light on the naval history of 1775. 
Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols. 
Folio. Washington, 1837-53. 

Prints important South Carolina official 
records, notably the early journals of the 
South Carolina Navy Board. The manu- 



i 



Bibliography 501 



script journals of the South Carolina Navy- 
Board are in the New York State Library . 
at Albany. 
Gazette of State of South Carolina for 1776- 

1779. Charleston. 

Files for part of the period at Charleston. 
Valuable for the cruises of the naval ves- 
sels. 
Gibbes, R. W. Documentary History of the 
American Revolution. 3 vols. New York, 
1853-57. 

Contains some naval information. 
McCrady, Edward, History of South Carolina 
in the Revolution. 2 vols. New York and 
London, 1,901-02. 

Of value for 1775 and for a history of the 
"South Carolina." 
Moultrie, William. Memoirs of the American 
Revolution. 2 vols. New York, 1802. 
Of little value for naval history. 
Poore's Constitutions. Washington, 1877. 
Contains the constitution of South Caro- 
lina of 1776. 
Pennsylvania Packet for 1782. Philadelphia. 
Contains valuable material for the move- 
ments of the "South Carolina" during 
1782. 
Ramsay, David. Revolution of South Caro- 
lina, Trenton, 1785. 

Of slight value for naval history. 
South Carolina and American General Gazette 
for 1776-1779. Charleston. 

Files for part of the period at Charleston. 
Valuable for the cruises of the naval ves- 
sels. 
South Carolina Archives, Columbia. Journals 
of General Assembly for 1776. MSS. 

Of value for the civil history of the navy. 

South Carolina Archives, Columbia. Journals 

of the House of Representatives for 1779- 

1780. MSS. 



502 Bibliography 



Throws light upon the naval history for 
1779-1780. 
South Carolina Archives, Columbia. Journals 
of the House of Representatives for 1783. 
MSS. 

Valuable for the naval services of Commo- 
dore Gillon. 
South Carolina Archives, Columbia. Miscel- 
laneous Records A. MSS. 

Contains some important naval records. 
South Carolina Historical Society Collections. 
3 vols. Charleston, 1857-59. 

Reprints a part of the J ournals of the South 
Carolina Committee of Safety. 
South Carolina Historical and Genealogical 
Magazine. 2 vols. Charleston, 1900-01. 
Prints two important letters of Commo- 
dore Gillon. 
Wharton, Francis. Revolutionary Diplomatic 
Correspondence. 6 vols. Washington, 1889. 
Contains a note upon Commodore Gillon. 

THE MINOR NAVIES OF THE SOUTHERN 
STATES 

Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols. 
FoHo. Washington, 1837-53. 

Prints official records. Of considerable 
value for the navies of Maryland, North 
Carolina, and Georgia. 
Georgia Historical Society Collections. 5 vols. 
Savannah, 1840-1902. 

Prints a part of the proceedings of the 
Georgia Council of Safety. Contains a 
few naval items of importance. 
Jones, C. C, jr. History of Georgia. 2 vols. 
Boston, 1883. 

Contains a few references to the work of 
the Georgia galleys. 
Maryland Archives. 21 vols. Baltimore, 
1883-1901. 



Bibliography 503 



Contains much information concerning the 
Maryland navy. This may be found by 
consulting the index for the names of the 
vessels. 
Maryland Statutes. Kilty, 2 vols. Annapo- 
lis, 1799-1800. 

Kilty is best. Hanson supplements Kilty. 
McCall, Hugh. History of Georgia. 2 vols. 
Savannah, 1811-16. 

Volume II gives some information in re- 
spect to the Georgia galleys. 
North Carolina Records. 18 vols. Raleigh, 
1886-1900. 

The most valuable source for the history 
of the North Carolina navy. 
Ridgely, David. Annals of Annapolis. Balti- 
more, 1841. 

Narrates an important event or two in the 
history of the Maryland navy. 
Scharf, J. T. History of Maryland. 3 vols. 
Baltimore, 1879. 

Volume II contains naval information of 
considerable value. 
Southern Literary Messenger for 1857. Rich- 
mond. 

Contains an excellent account of the Bat- 
tle of the Barges. 

THE MINOR NAVIES OF THE NORTHERN 
STATES 

Arnold, Samuel G. History of Rhode Island, 
2 vols. New York, 1859. 

Volume II contains a few items of naval 
information. 

Carson, H. L. Supreme Court of the United 
States. Philadelphia, 1902. 

Contains references to the admiralty legis- 
lation of New York. 

Connecticut Gazette for 1779. New London. 
Gives a good account of the achievements 
of Captain Talbot. 



504 Bibliography 



Fernow's New York in the Revolution. Al- 
bany, 1887. 

Contains the rolls of several New York 
vessels. 
Force, Peter. American Archives. 9 vols. 
Folio. Washington, 1837-53. 

Prints important records for Rhode Is- 
land, New Hampshire, and New York. 
New Hampshire Archives. MSS. Concord. 

References to the "Hampden." 
New Jersey, Minutes of the Provincial Con- 
gress and Council of Safety, 1775-1776. 
Trenton, 1879. 

Of some value for the prize legislation in 
New Jersey. 
New York, Journals of New York Provincial 
Convention, etc. 2 vols. Albany, 1842. 
Valuable for the history of the New York 
navy. 
Providence Gazette for 1775-1779. Provi- 
dence. 

Valuable for the movements and prizes 
of Rhode Island vessels. 
Pennsylvania Packet for 1779. Philadelphia. 
Contains original material for the cruises 
of Captain Talbot. 
Poore's Constitutions. Washington, 1877. 
Contains the constitution of New York for 
1777. 
Rhode Island, -Acts and Resolves for 1775- 
1783. 

Contemporaneous prints. A valuable 
source for the history of the Rhode Island 
navy. 
Rhode Island Colonial Records. 10 vols. 
Providence, 1856-65. 

Supplements the information contained in 
the Acts and Resolves. 
Rhode Island Historical Collections. 8 vols. 
Providence, 1827-92. 

Contains letters which are valuable for the 
naval history of 1775. 



Bib.iography 505 



Rhode Island Historical Society Publications 
VIII. Providence, 1900. 

Important for the naval history of Rhode 
Island for 1778. 
Rhode Island. Journals of the Council of 
War. MSS. Providence. 

Of some value for the years 1779-1781. 
Staples, W. R. Annals of Providence. Prov- 
idence, 1843. 

Contains a brief account of the Rhode 
Island navy. 
Sheffield, W. P. Rhode Island Privateers and 
Privateersmen. Newport, 1883. 
A fairly good account. 



APPENDIX B 

A LIST OF COMMISSIONED OFFICERS WHO 
SERVED IN THE NAVY AND MARINE 
CORPS OF THE UNITED STATES DUR- 
ING THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION^ 



NAVY 

COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF 

1. Esek Hopkins. 

CAPTAINS 

1. Joseph Nicholson. 

2. John Manly. 

3. Hector McNeil. 

4. Dudley Saltonstall. 

5. Nicholas Biddle. 



1. This list is compiled from two lists of naval officers 
which are now found in the Division of Manuscripts of 
the Library of Congress. One of these was prepared by 
the Naval Department in 1781, the other by the Auditor's 
Office of the Treasury Department in 1794. A complete 
roster of the naval officers of the Revolution does not 
exist. The list now printed is almost complete. It may 
contain a few inaccuracies. The names are arranged 
alphabetically, with the exception of those of the first 
twenty-four naval captains, which are arranged according 
to rank. 



1 



List of Oncers 507 

6. Thomas Thompson. 

7. John Barry. 

8. Thomas Read. 

9. Thomas Grennel. 

10. Charles Alexander. 

11. Lambert Wickes. 

12. Abraham Whipple. 

13. John B. Hopkins. 

14. John Hodge. 

15. William Hallock. 

16. Hoysted Hacker. 

17. Isaiah Robinson. 

18. John Paul Jones. 

19. James Josiah. 

20. Elisha Hinman. 

21. Joseph Olney. 

22. James Robinson. 

23. John Young. 

24. Elisha Warner. 

25. John Ayres. 

26. Peter Brewster. 

27. WiUiam Burke. 

28. Samuel Chew. 

29. Gustavus Conyngham. 

30. Benjamin Dunn. 

31. John Green. 

32. Seth Harding. 

33. John Hazard. 

34. Henry Johnson. 

35. Peter Landais. 

36. John Nicholson. 

37. Samuel Nicholson. 

38. WilHam Pickles. 

39. John P. Rathburn. 

40. Thomas Simpson. 

41. John Skimmer. 

42. WiUiam Stone 

43. Silas Talbot. 

44. Samuel Tucke 

45. Daniel Waters 



5o8 List of Officers 



LIEUTENANTS 

1. Robert Adamson. 

2. Joseph Adams. 

3. Thomas Albertson. 

4. Blaney Allison. 

5. John Angus. 

6. James Armitage. 

7. Rhodes Arnold. 

8. Josiah Audibert. 

9. John Baldwin. 

10. William Barnes. 

11. Joshua Barney. 

12. Benjamin Barron. 

13. WilUam Barron. 

14. Benjamin Bates. 

15. George Batson. 

16. Daniel Bears. 

17. John Bellenger. 

18. Elijah Bowen. 

19. Christopher Bradley. 

20. Jacob Brooks. 

21. John Brown. 

22. PhiHp Brown. 

23. Isaac Buck. 

24. Charles Bulkley. 

25. Edward Burke. 

26. Ezekiel Burroughs. 

27. Samuel Cardal. 

28. George Champlin. 

29. John Channing, 

30. Seth Clarke. 

31. David Cullam. 

32. Richard Dale. 

33. James Degge. 

34. William Dennis, 

35. Peter Deville. 

36. Silas Devol. 

37. Arthur Dillaway. 

38. Joseph Doble. 

39. Marie Sevel Doric, 



List of Officers 509 

40. William Dunlap. 

41. William Dupar. 

42. John Fanning. 

43. Joshua Fanning. 

44. Wilford Fisher. 

45. Patrick Fletcher. 

46. Robert French. 

47. William Gamble. 

48. Nicholas E. Gardner. 

49. Joseph Greenway. 

50. Stephen Gregory. 

51. WilHam Grinnell. 

52. James Grinwell. 

53. Simon Gross. 

54. Elijah Hall. 

55. William Ham. 

56. Benjamin Handy. 

57. James Handy. 

58. Robert Harris. 

59. Abraham Hawkins. 

60. John Hennesey. 

61. Stephen Hill. 

62. Christopher Hopkins. 

63. Esek Hopkins, jr. 

64. William Hopkins. 

65. George House. 

66. Robert Hume. 

67. Aquilla Johns. 

68. John Kemp. 

69. John Kerr. 

70. Michael Knies. 

71. Benjamin Knight. 

72. William Leeds. 

73. Edward Leger. 

74. John Lewis. 

75. Muscoe Livingston. 

76. George Lovie. 

77. Cutting Lunt. 

78. Henry Lunt. 

79. John McDougal. 

80. John Mclvers. 



510 List of Officers 

81. Jonathan Maltbie. 

82. John Margisson. 

83. Robert Martin. 

84. Richard Marvin. 

85. Luke Mathewman, 

86. William Mollison. 

87. John Moran. 

88. William Moran. 

89. William Morrison. 

90. Alexander Murray. 

91. Isaac Olney. 

92. Benjamin Page. 

93. David Phipps. 

94. James Pine. 

95. Jonathan Pitcher. 

96. Robert Pomeroy. 

97. David Porter. 

98. William Potts. 

99. Jonathan Pritchard. 

100. Benjamin Reed. 

101. Peter Richards. 

102. John Rodez. 

103. James Robertson. 

104. John Robinson. 

105. Peter Rosseau. 

106. Robert Saunders. 

107. John Scott. 

108. Robert Scott. 

109. John Scranton. 

110. Nicholas Scull. 

111. Benjamin Seabury. 

112. James Sellers. 

113. Josiah Shackford. 

114. Peter Shores. 

115. John Sleymaker. 

116. Daniel Starr. 

117. James Stephens. 

118. John Stevens. 

119. Adam W. Thaxter. 

120. Mathew Tibbs. 

121. Daniel Vaughan. 





List of Officers 


511 


122. 


Thomas Vaughan. 




123. 


Joseph Vesey. 




124. 


Thomas Weaver. 




125. 


David Welch. 




126. 


Hezekiah Welch. 




127. 


John Wheelwright. 




128. 


Jacob White. 




129. 


Jacob White (?). 




130. 


Richard Wickes. 




131. 


/ames Wilson. 




132. 


■Robert Wilson. 




133. 


Hopley Yeaton 




134. 


Samuel York. 





MARINE CORPS 



MAJOR 

1. Samuel Nichols. 

CAPTAINS 

1. Edward Arrowsmith. 

2. Seth Baxter. 

3. Abraham Boyce. 

4. Isaac Craig. 

5. Benjamin Dean. 

6. James Disney. 

7. John Elliott. 

8. Robert ElHott. 

9. Joseph Hardy. 

10. John Hazard. 

11. William Holton. 

12. William Jones, 

13. Dennis Leary. 

14. William Mathewman. 

15. William Morris. 

16. Robert Mullen. 

17. William Nicholson. 

18. George Jerry Osborn. 

19. Richard Palmes. 

20. Matthew Parke. 

21. Miles Pennington. 

22. Andrew Porter. 
23. Rice. 

24. Gilbert Saltonstall. 

25. Samuel Shaw. 

26. Joseph Shoemaker 



i 





List of Officers 


513 


27. 


Spence. 




28. 


_ ohn Stewart. 




29. 


^ ohn Trevitt. 
;51ihu Trowbridge. 




30. 




31. 


John Welch. 

LIEUTENANTS 




V 1. 


WiUiam Barney. 




2. 


William Barney (?). 




3. 


Henry Becker. 




4. 


Peter Bedford. 




5. 


David Bill. 




6. 


Gurdon Bill. 




7. 


Abraham Boyce. 




8. 


Peregrine Brown. 




9. 


Benjamin Catlin. 




10. 


Seth Chapin. 
John Chilton. 




11. 




12. 


_ ames Clark. 




13. 

Mis. 


^ ames Cokely. 




James Connolly. 




William Cooper. 




16. 


David Cullam. 




17. 


Robert Cummings. 




18. 


Henry Dayton, 




19. 


Robert Davis. 




20. 


Panatier De la Falconier. 




21. 


Lewis De la Valette. 




22. 


John Dimsdell. 




23. 


Stephen Earl. 




24. 


Thomas Elting. 




25. 


Thomas Elwood. 




26. 


Zebadiah Farnham. 




27. 


William Fielding. 




28. 


Thomas Fitzgerald. 




29. 


John Fitzpatrick. 




30. 


Samuel Gamage. 




31. 


William Gilmore. 




32. 


Peter Green. 




33. 


John Guignace. 
Roger Haddock. 




34. 





514 I^i^t of Officers 

35. James Hamilton 

36. Jonas Hamilton. 

37. William Hamilton. 

38. John Harris. 

39. John Harris (?). 

40. Richard Harrison. 

41. Samuel Hempsted. 

42. Daniel Henderson. 

43. Samuel Holt. 

44. Benjamin Huddle. 

45. William Huddle. 

46. Robert Hunter. 

47. William Jennison. 
48. Kelly. 

49. Hugh Kirkpatrick, 

50. Daniel Longstreet. 

51. David Love. 

52. Eugene McCarthy. 

53. James McClure. 

54. Richard McClure. 

55. Charles McHarron. 

56. Robert McNeal. 

57. Peter Manifold. 

58. Stephen Meade. 

59. Jonathan Mix. 

60. Hugh Montgomery. 

61. Abel Morgan. 

62. William Morris. 

63. Alexander Neilson. 

64. Avery Parker. 

65. Samuel Powars. 

66. Thomas Pownal. 

67. Samuel Prichard. 

• 68. Thomas Plunkett. 

69. William Radford. 

70. Franklin Reed. 

71. Jerry Reed. 

72. Nathaniel Richards. 

73. Alpheus Rice. 

74. Jabez Smith. 

75. Walter Spooner. 



List of Officers 515 

76. Edmund Stack. 

77. Daniel Starr. 

78. J. M. Strobach. 

79. Benjamin Thompson. 
f 80. George Trumbull. 

^ 81. Thomas Turner. 

82. Nathaniel Twing. 

83. Abraham Vandyke. 

84. Zebulon Varnam. 
85. Wadsworth. 

86. Samuel Wallingsworth. 

87. James Warren. 

88. James Warren (?). 

89. William Waterman. 

90. Jacob White. 

91. James H. Wilson. 

92. Jonathan Woodworth. 



APPENDIX C 

A LIST OF ARMED VESSELS IN THE SERV- 
ICE OF THE UNITED STATES DURING 
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION^ 



PRINCIPAL FLEET OF THE CONTINEN- 
TAL CONGRESS 







No. of 


Period of 


Rig. 


Name. 


guns. 


Service. 


1 ship 


Alfred 


24 


1775-1778 


2 ship 


Columbus 


20 


1775-1778 


3 brig 


Andrew Doria 


14 


1775-1777 


4 brig 


Cabot 


14 


1775-1777 


5 sloop 


Providence 


14 


1775-1779 


6 sloop 


Hornet 


10 


1775-1777 


7 schooner 


Wasp 


8 


1775-1777 


8 schooner 


Fly 


8 


1775-1777 


9 brig 


Lexington 


16 


1776-1777 


10 brig 


Reprisal 


16 


1776-1777 


11 brig 


Hampden 


14 


1776-1777 


12 sloop 


Independence 


10 


1776-1778 


13 sloop 


Sachem 


10 


1776-1777 


14 sloop 


Mosquito 


4 


1776-1777 


15 frigate 


Raleigh 


32 


1777-1778 


16 -frigate 


Hancock 


32 


1777 


17 frigate 


Warren 


32 


1777-1779 



1, The term "Period of Service" is used in a somewhat 
general sense. The dates are close approximations. 
Among the vessels used by the Naval Department as 
packets, merchantmen, or scout-ships are the following: 
"Despatch," "Georgia Packet," "Phoenix," "Merctiry," 
"Baltimore," "Enterprise," and "Fame." 






List of Armed Vessels 



517 



18 


frigate 


19 


frigate 


20 


frigate 


21 


frigate 


22 


frigate 


23 


frigate 


24 


frigate 


25 


frigate 


26 


frigate 


27 


frigate 


28 


ship 


29 


brigantine 


30 


sloop 


31 


frigate 


32 


snip 


33 


brigantine 


34 


galley- 


35 


frigate 


36 


sloop 


37 


brig 


38 


ship 


39 


ship of the 


40 


ship 


41 


ship 


42 


frigate 



Washington 


32 


1777-1778 


Randolph 


32 


1777-1778 


Providence 


28 


1777-1780 


Trumbull 


28 


1777-1781 


Congress 


28 


1777 


Virginia 


28 


1777-1778 


Effingham 


28 


1777-1778 


Boston 


24 


1777-1780 


Montgomery 


24 


1777 


Delaware 


24 


1777 


Ranger 


18 


1777-1780 


Resistance 


10 


1777-1778 


Surprise 




1777 


Alliance 


32 


1778-1785 


General Gates 


18 


1778-1779 


Retaliation 




1778 


Pigot 


"8 


1778 


Confederacy 


32 


1779-1781 


Argo 


12 


1779 


Diligent 


12 


1779 


Saratoga 


18 


1780-1781 


hne America 


74 


1782 


Washington 
Due de Lauzur 


20 


1782-1784 


L 20 


1782-1783 


Bourbon 


36 


1783 



FLEET FITTED OUT IN FRANCE 



1 ship 



Bon Homme 





Richard 


42 


1779 


2 ship 


Indian 


40 


1777 


3 frigate 


Deane or Hague32 


1777-1783 


4 frigate 


Queen of France 28 


1777-1780 


5 ship 


Pallas 


30 


1779 


6 ship 


Ariel 


20 


1780-1781 


7 cutter 


Cerf 


18 


1779 


8 cutter 


Revenge 


14 


1777-1779 


9 brig 


Vengeance 


12 


1779 


.0 cutter 


Dolphin 


10 


1777 


.1 lugger 


Surprise 


10 


1777 



5i8 List of Armed 


Vessels 




pollock's fleet 




1 ship 


Morris 


24 


1778-1779 


2 sloop 


West Florida 




1779-1780 


3 schooner 






1779 


Washington's fleet 


1 schooner 


Hannah 




1775 


2 schooner 


Lynch 




1775-1776 


3 schooner 


Franklin 




1775-1776 


4 schooner 


Lee 


"4 


1775-1776 


5 schooner 


Harrison 




1775-1776 


6 schooner 


Warren 




1775-1776 


7 brigantine Washington 


10 


1775-1776 


8 schooner 


Hancock 




1776 


9 sloop 


Gen'l Schuyler .... 


1776 


10 sloop 


Gen'l Mifflin 


.... 


1776 


11 galley 


Lady Washington 

Arnold's fleet^ 


1776-1777 


1 sloop 


Enterprise 


12 


1776 


2 schooner 


Royal Savage 


12 


1776 


3 schooner 


Revenge 


8 


1776 


4 schooner 


Liberty 


8 


1776 


5' gondola 


New Haven 


3 


1776 


6 gondola 


Providence 


3 


1776 


7 gondola 


Boston 


3 


1776 


8 gondola 


Spitfire 


3 


1776 


9 gondola 


Philadelphia 


3 


1776 


10 gondola 


Connecticut 


3 


1776 


11 gondola 


/ersey 
New York 


3 


1776 


12 gondola 


3 


1776 


13 galley 


Lee 


6 


1776 


14 galley 


Trumbull 


8 


1776 


15 galley 


Congress 


8 


1776 


16 galley 


Washington 


8 


1776 


17 galley 


Gates 


8 


1776 


1. Several o 


f Arnold's vessels 


were employed on thi 


Lakes in 1775. 









J 



INDEX 



Abaco, Island of, 58. 

Abercrombie, Lieutenant-Colonel, 414. 

"Accomac," the, 406, 411. 

Accounts, Naval, settling of, 70, 196. 225, 227- 
228, 246-247, 303-304, 440. 

"Active," the, 335 and note, 349, 352. 

Adams, John, early naval services, 32, 36-41, 
46, 48, 51, 82-83, 86, 97, 98 and note, 135; 
in France, 161, 254-255, 257, 276, 292; and 
Massachusetts naval affairs, 321, 324. 

Adams, Samuel, naval services, 83, 86, 89 and 
note; administrative views, 186, 211, 215, 
225; and Penobscot expedition, 349. 

"Admiral Duff," the, 345. 

"Admiral Keppel," the, 369. 

Admiralty Courts, of Continental Congress, 
48-49, 67-68, 203, 233, 478; of Massachus- 
etts, 68, 148, 322-323, 327-328: of Connecti- 
cut, 365, 474; of Pennsylvania, 148, 391- 
392; in France, 266-267, 282-283; of Vir- 
ginia, 403-405; of South Carolina, 423-424; 
of Maryland, 444, 474; of North Carolina, 
459; of Georgia, 462; of Rhode Island, 467- 
468, 474; of New York, 476; of New Hamp- 
shire, 476-477; of New Jersey, 477-478. 

"Adventure," the brig, 397, 406. 

"Adventure," the schooner, 397. 

Africa, 173, 176, 279-280. 

Agent of Marine, appointment of, 218-226; 
office of, 226-228; legislation under, 228- 
235; movement of fleet under, 235-240; 
recommendations of, 240-244; last work of, 
244-250; 257, 302, 394. 



520 Index 



"Albany," the, 350. 

Alexander, Charles, 123. 

"Alfred," the, 52, 55, 57, 59, 97, 133, 158, 175, 

281 
"Alliance," the, 122, 204, 206, 220, 231, 235, 

236-238, 248-250, 295-300, 302. 
"Amelia," the, 442. 
"America," the. 111, 122, 145, 204, 219-220, 

235, 247. 
"American Congress," the, 398. 
"American Turtle," the, 364. 
Amsterdam, 264, 311, 436-437. 
"Andrew Doria," the, 52, 57, 59. 
AnnapoHs, 442, 446. 
"Annapolis," the, 442. 
Antigua, 306-307, 344. 
Appeals in prize cases, 49, 68, 327, 365-366, 

391, 404-405, 475, 477. 
Appointments, in Continental navy, 52-55, 105- 

107, 108-109, 119, 124-125, 160, 257-260, 

309. 
"Ariadne," the, 408. 
"Ariel," the, 300. 
"Argo," the, 469-470. 
Arnold, Benedict, 73-78, 414, 415, 446. 
"Arnold," the, 376, 379, 385. 
Arnold and Phillips, raid of, 408, 413-415, 

446. 
Arnold's fleet, 71-78, 475. 
Articles of Confederation, 197, 200-202, 417, 

434-435. 
"Atalanta," the, 206. 
"Augusta," the, 385. 
"Aurora," the, 468. 
Aylett, WilHam, 405. 
Azores, the, 368. 

Bagaduce, Maine, 348-351. 
Bahamas, the, 58, 328, 438. 
"Bailie," the, 236. 

Baltimore, 51, 56, 57, 93, 99, 102, 168, 249, 
331, 442, 443, 475. 






I 



Index 521 

"Baltimore," the, 442. 

Baltimore Committee of Observation, 93, 442. 

Barbadoes, the, 176, 431. 

Barclay, Thomas, 302-303. 

Barney, Joshua, 248-249, 394. 

Barnwell, John, 418, 459. 

Barron, James, 397, 402, 407, 416. 

Barron, Richard, 397, 407. 

Barry, John, 109 note, 206, 236-238, 802. 

Bartlett, Josiah, 86. 

"Batchelor," the, 169. 

Battle of the Barges, 449-451. 

Beaufort, S. C, 423, 428. 

"Beaufort," the, 428. 

Belfast, 293. 

"Bellona," the, 459. 

Bergen, 304. 

"Berkenbosch," the, 273. 

Bermudas, the, 156, 167, 171, 173, 180, 206. 
236, 328, 342, 457, 465. 

"Betsey," the, 419. 

Beverly, Mass., 63. 

Bilbao, 256, 331. 

Biddle, Nicholas, 54, 57, 120, 123, 430. 

Biddle, Owen, 373. 

Bingham, William, 266, 305-306. 

"Bishop Landaff," the, 471-472. 

Blackburn, John, 454. 

"Black Duck," the, 389. 

"Black Prince," the privateer, 260-261. 

"Black Prince," the ship, 52. 

"Black Princess," the, 260-261. 

Blake, Edward, 420, 425. 

Bland, Theodoric, 222, 223. 

Blewer, Joseph, 382. 

"Blonde," the, 350. 

Board of Admiralty, appointment, 181-188; 
duties, 188-189; pay, 189-190; selection, 
190-194; legislative work, 194-203; move- 
ment of fleet under, 203-208; discontinu- 
ance, 208-209, 219-222, 227-229. 



;22 Index 



Board of Treasury, Continental, 184, 188, 205, 

247, 249, 250. 
Board of War, Continental, 184, 187. 
Board of War, Massachusetts, 329-332, 335- 

337, 343, 345, 348, 351. 
"Bolton," the, 59. 
"Bon Homme Richard," the, 163, 258, 295- 

298. 
Bordeaux, 256, 276, 292, 436. 
Bordentown, 97, 99, 102, 387. 
Boston, 63, 93, 94, 113, 114, 139, 140, 148, 

154, 168, 172, 203, 206, 247, 248, 328, 352, 

353, 361. 
"Boston," the, 91, 158, 204, 207, 292, 344, 

390, 433, 434. 
Boston Bay, 156. 
Boucher, John Henry, 402, 444. 
Boulogne, 262. 
Bounties, 46, 128, 146, 198, 403, 410, 411, 432, 

443. 
"Bourbon," the, 92, 122, 204, 235, 240. 
Bowen, OHver, 459, 460, 461. 
Boys, Captain, 395. 

Braddock, Captain, of Georgia navy, 461. 
Bradford, John, 69, 94, 95. 
Bradford, WilHam, 382, 387. 
Brest, 256. 

"Bricole," the, 433, 434. 
"Britannia," the, 357. 
British fleet on Lake Champlain, 76. 
Brooke, Walter, 402. 
Broughton, Nicholson, 33, 61-63, 66. 
Brown, John, 227, 231. 
Bryan, George, 190. 
"Bulloch," the, 461. 
Burdon, George, 293. 
Burgoyne, General, 77, 384. 
Bushnell, David, 363-364. 
Buzzard's Bay, 339. 

"Cabot," the, 52, 57, 58, 59, 158, 175. 
-^adiz, 261. 



Index 523 

Cadrigal, General, 438. 

Caldwell, Thomas, 378. 

Calvert, Captain, 308. 

Canada, 72, 151, 173. 

"Camden," the, 475. 

"Camilla," the, 350. 

Campbell, Captain, 461. 

Campbell, Lord William, 419-420. 

Cape Cod, 279. 

Cape Fear, 156, 165, 452. 

Cape Francois, 207, 237, 305, 331, 460. 

CaT?tures, Continental, legislation concerning, 

49-50, 126-127, 200-201, 232-234. See 

Prizes. 
Carleton, Sir Guy, 76, 77. 
Carmichael, William, 260. 
Castine, Maine, 348. 
Caswell, Governor, 458. 
"Caswell," the, 406, 456, 458, 459. 
Catherine II. of Russia, 274. 
Champlain, Lake, 72-78, 475. 
Champlin, George, 165. 
"Chance," the, 169. 
Charleston, S. C, 154, 156, 166, 167, 369, 419- 

423, 425, 427, 432-434. 
Chase, Samuel, 51, 82, 86. 
Chatham, Conn., 92, 204. 
"Chatham," the, 390. 
Chaumont, Ray de, 296. 
"Cherokee," the, 419, 420. 
"Chester," the, 442, 444. 
Chew, Samuel, 165. 

Chickahominy shipyard, 400, 401, 413, 414. 
Clinton, General Henry, 408, 445. 
Clouston, John, 332, 343. 
Cochran, Robert, 421-422, 427. 
Coit, William, 359, 368 note. 
ColHer, Sir George, 350. 
"Columbus," the, 52, 57, 59, 133, 175. 
"Comet," the galley, 461. 
"Comet," the schooner, 421. 



524 Index 

"Commerce," the, 419. 

Commerce, American, 241. 

Commercial agents of Congress, 105, 253, 256- 

257, 305-311. 
Commercial Committee of Congress, 160, 162, 

257, 307. 
Commissary-General of Issues, 204. 
Commissary-General of Prisoners, 96, 116, 209, 

222. 

Commissary-General of Purchases, 116. 

Commissioners at Paris, 105, 116, 254; work 
of, 255-294. 

Commissions for Continental Navv, 50, 109, 
188, 197, 199-200, 258; for privateers, 127, 
200, 260-261, 321; for Massachusetts navy, 
201; for Pennsylvania navy, 374. 

Committee of Foreign Affairs, 160, 162, 255, 
277-280. 

Committee of Secret Correspondence, 162, 255, 

258, 260, 276, 283, 305. 
"Confederacv," the, 112, 122, 204, 207-208, 

306, 390."^ 
"Confederate," the, 208. 
"Congress," the frigate, 92. 
"Congress," the galley, 461. 
Connecticut Council, 354, 355, 366. 
Connecticut Council of Safety, 75, 95, 354-363, 

369, 371. 
Connecticut Gazette, 359, 362. 
Connecticut General Assembly, 354, 355, 358, 

360, 361, 363-367, 371-372. 
Connecticut, Governor of, 75, 92, 95, 354-364. 

369, 371. 
Connecticut House of Representatives, 354, 

366. 
Connecticut Journal, 362. 
Connecticut Navy, 315; beginning of, 355-360; 

administration of, 360-363; regulations of, 

361, 366-367; vessels, 355-360, 367-370; 
end of, 369-370. 

Connecticut, warfare of armed boats, 370-372, 



Index 525 



"Conqueror," the, 442, 444, 

Consular bureau, 139-140. 

Continental agents, 95, 103, 105, 257, 305, 307. 

Continental Congress, movement for a navy in, 
34-38, 81-84; legislation respecting navy, 
37-38, 41-51, 84-85, 105-107, 109, 119-133, 
145-146, 154, 196-203, 228-235, 245-250, 
259, 261-263; legislation respecting Naval 
Department, 37-38, 86-88, 93-94, 96-98, 
101-103, 109, 113, 187-193, 195-196, 208- 
209, 216-224, 301-304; prepares a fleet on 
Lakes, 71-73; and prize courts, 48-50, 
67-69, 203, 327, 365, 391, 404, 467, 477- 
478; action respecting Esek Hopkins, 133- 
138; action respecting consuls, 140; ignor- 
ance of navy, 182-183; establishes admin- 
istrative boards, 184, 212; factions of, 186; 
210-216; refuses to increase navy, 240-244; 
ends navy, 245; relations with Oliver Pol- 
lock, 307-311; 315, 322, 333, 357, 385, 392, 
402, 405, 409, 412, 417, 418, 421, 437, 438, 
443, 447, 460, 465, 469, 472, 473, 475. 

Continental Navy, movements for a, 32-42, 
80-85; executive organs of, 38-41, 60, 86- 
90, 93-103, 187-196, 216-218, 223-228, 252- 
257,302-307; rules of, 43-48; legislation re- 
specting, 42-51, 85-86, 121-133, 196-201, 
228-230, 232-234; vessels of, 51-52, 90-93, 
110-112, 114, 121-123, 156-158, 203-205, 
219-220, 235, 247-249, 261-266, 281, 306, 
315, 344, 349, 388, 394, 433, 434, 465, 469- 
470; officers of, 51-55, 105-110, 117, 123- 
126, 128-129, 133-139, 158-160, 165, 258- 
260; expeditions of, 55-60, 168-169, 171- 
173, 205-208, 236-239, 283-284, 286-300, 
302, 308-311; uniform of, 117-118; condi- 
tions of, 141-160; general movements of, 
161-180, 276-280; recommendations for 
increase of, 239-243; end of, 244-251; 
breaches of neutraHty by, 273-274, 284- 
292; 375, 427, 444, 447. 



526 Index 

Contraband, 200, 232. 

"Convention," the, 377, 385, 388, 389. 

Conyngham, Gustavus, 173, 179, 258, 260, 
268, 273, 287, 290. 

Cook, Captain James, 258, 275 note. 

Cook, George, 444, 449. 

Cooke, Nicholas, 463, 465. 

"Cormorant," the, 244, 415-416. 

Cornwallis, surrender of, 239, 240. 

Coromandel Coast, 170, 279. 

Coruiia, 256, 438. 

Cottineau, Captain, 297. 

Coulthard, Captain, 206. 

"Countess of Scarborough," the, 164, 296-297. 

Courts-martial and courts of inquiry, in Conti- 
nental navy, 44-45, 109, 131-139, 198-199, 
228-232, 298-299, 300; in Connecticut 
navy, 366; in Pennsylvania navy, 375, 
386-387. 

Court of appeals for trial of prize cases, 203. 

Crane, Stephen, 84. 

"Crane," the, 360, 369. 

Crawford, John, 231. 

Cregier, Thomas, 472. 

Cropper, John, 450. 

Cross, Stephen, 336. 

Gushing, Nathan, 323. 

Gushing, Thomas, 328 

Dale, Richard, 258. 

Dalton, John, 398. 

Danish government, 304, 

Dartmouth, Mass., 325, 339. 

Davidson, Samuel, 378-379. 

Davis, Caleb, 337, 338. 

Davis, James, 453-454. 

Dawson, George, 238. 

Deane, Silas, 37, 38, 51-52, 54, 82, 86, 148, 

154; in France, 254, 258-260, 266, 276-278, 

282 292 
"Deane," the, 171, 203, 220, 231, 232, 235, 

236, 262, 263, 306, 344, 352, 390. 



Index 527 



"Defence," the barge, 448. 
"Defence," the schooner, 420, 421. 
"Defence," the ship, of the Connecticut navy, 

359, 368, 369, 370. 
"Defence," the ship, of the Maryland navy, 

441, 442, 449. 
"Defence," the sloop, 339. 
Delaware, 315. 
"Delaware," the frigate, 93. 
"Delaware," the schooner, 377, 385. 
Deshon, John, 98, 99, 113, 196, 355, 357. 
D'Estaing, Count, 116, 139, 167. 
Devil's Island, 449. 
Dewey, Admiral, 179. 
"Diamond," the, 468. 
"Dickinson," the, 386, 387. 
"Diligence," the, 406, 411. 
"Diligent," the brig, 349. 
"Diligent," the schooner, 320. 
"Dolphin," the cutter, 262, 281, 287, 289. 
"Dolphin," the schooner, 442, 444. 
Douglass, William, 72. 
Dover, England, 262. 
"Dragon," the, 406, 411. 
"Drake," the, 164, 293. 
Drayton, William Henry, 421. 
Duane, James, 223. 

"Due de Lauzun," the, 235, 237, 248, 303. 
Dunkirk, 256, 260, 287, 290, 437. 
Dunmore, Lord, 56, 396, 453. 
"Duras," the, 295. 
Dutch government, 273. 
Dyer, Eliphalet, 82. 

"Eagle," the British ship, 364. 

"Eagle," the, of the South Carolina navy, 430. 

Eastern Coast, the, 320, 338, 339, 343, 344, 

353 
East Haddam, Conn., 360. 
Edenton, N. C, 93, 452, 455, 458. 
"Efhngham," the frigate, 92, 388. 
"Effingham," the galley, 386. 



528 Index 

Ellery, William, 90, 182, 191-194, 196, 2C8. 
Elliot, Samuel, 361, 362 and note. 
Ellis, Richard, 458-459. 
Ellsworth, Oliver, 222, 355. 
"Enterprise," the ship, 76. 
"Enterprise," the sloop, 72. 
Executive Departments of Congress, 107. 
Executive system, defects of, 210-214. 

Factions, in Congress, 186, 210-216. 

"Fair American," the, 430. 

"Falcon," the, 339. 

Falconer, Nathaniel, 101. 

"Fame," the, 306-307. 

"Fearnaught," the, 448. 

Ferrol, 291. 

Fisk, John, 328, 332, 343. 

Flags, 55, 120, 275-276, 327, 377. 

Florida, 167, 173, 175, 461. 

Floyd, WilHam, 191. - 

"Fly," the, of Continental navy, 56, 57, 158. 

"Fly," the, of Virginia navv, 416. 

"Flying Fish," the, 451. 

Forbes, James, 191, 192. 

Ford, Samuel, 386. 

Foreign Office of Congress, 160, 255. 

Fort Mercer, 385. 

Fort Mifflin, 385. 

Forton prison, 267, 270. 

"Fowey," the, 396. 

"Fox," the, 163. 

Franklin, Benjamin, 83, 378; in France, 254- 

256, 261, 262, 265-274, 282-284, 295, 296, 

298-303. 
"Franklin," the galley, 54, 390. 
"Franklin," the schooner, 63, 64. 
"Freedom," the, 325, 332, 343, 352. 
French fleet, 139, 166-167, 205, 207, 242, 247- 

248, 263, 276, 294, 344, 371, 389, 413. 
French government, 263, 265, 273, 282-289, 

294. 295. 298. 



Index 529 



Gadsden, Christopher, 38, 39, 82, 83, 86. 

"Gallatea," the, 350. 

Galvez, governor of Louisiana, 307-311. 

Gates, General Horatio, 74, 470. 

"General Gates," the, 122, 165, 173, 306. 

"General Greene," the, 390-391. 

"General Mifflin," the, 70. 

"General Monk," the, 393, 394. 

"General Moultrie," the, 430, 431, 433, 434. 

"General Putnam," the, 70, 472, 473, 474. 

"General Schuyler," the, 70, 472, 473, 474. 

Genoa, State of, 260. 

Georgetown, S. C., 422, 426, 434. 

Georgia Committee of Safety, 460. 

Georgia Navy, 315, 459-462. 

Georgia Provincial Congress, 459, 460. 

Gerard, French minister to United States, 119, 

140, 161, 166. 
Germaine, Lord George, 457. 
Gerry, Elbridge, 321, 323. 
Ghent, 436. 
Gibraltar, 268. 
Gillon, Alexander, 435-440. 
Glasgow, 276, 278. 
"Glasgow," the, 59, 133, 186. 
"Gloucester," the, 265. 
Glover, John, 62, 63. 
Goldsborough, Robert, 447. 
"Good Intent," the, 274. 
Gosport navy-yard, 93, 400, 408. 
Goodrich, a Tory privateersman, 165. 
Grannis, John, 136. 
Grason, Thomas, 443. 
Great Bridge, Va., 396. 
Green, John, 258, 263. 
"Greyhound," the, 350. 
Grimes, John, 466. 
Griswold, WilHam, 356. 
Groton, Conn., 371. 
Guadaloupe, 331. 
Guerard, Benjamin, 434. 



530 Index 

"Guilford," the, 367, 370. 
Gwinnett, Button, 461. 

Habersham, Joseph, 459. 

"Hague," the, 236, 248. 

Halifax, 156, 167, 465. 

Hall, Captain, 430. 

Hall, Giles, 355, 357. 

Hallet, Allen, 345. 

Hamilton, Alexander, 211, 213, 217-218. 

"Hampden," the brig, 175. 

"Hampden," the ship, 349, 476. 

Hampstead, Joshua, 452, 453. 

Hampton, Va., 396, 402, 412. 

Hancock, John, 86, 89, 353, 472. 

"Hancock," the frigate, 91, 158, 239, 344. 

"Hancock," the galley, 390. 

"Hancock," the schooner, 63. 

Handy, Joseph, 450. 

Handy, Levin, 450. 

"Hannah," the, a merchantman, 475. 

"Hannah," the, of Washintgon's fleet, 33, 61, 

62. 
Haraden, Jonathan, 343, 
Harding, Seth, 207, 359. 
Hardy, Captain, 461. 
Harris, Captain, 407. 
Harrison, Benjamin, 413. 
Harrison, William Hanson, 447. 
"Harrison," the, of Virginia navy, 416. 
"Harrison," the, of Washington's fleet, 63, 65. 
Harrison and Van Bibber, 443. 
Hartford, Conn., 355. 
Hartford Courant, 362. 
Hartley, David, 269. 
Hatcher, Captain, 461. 
Havana, 237, 305, 309, 311, 435, 438. 
"Hawk," the, 59. 
Hayden, Uriah, 359. 
"Hazard," the, 33*5, 342, 349, 352. 
Hazelwood, John, 376, 380, 384, 385, 386, 388. 
Heath, General, 116. 



i 



Index 531 

Henry, Patrick, 211. 

"Henry," the, 411. 

Hewes, Joseph, 38, 41, 86, 90, 454. 

"Hibernia," the, 168, 169. 

Hill, Whitmill, 193. 

" Hinchinbrooke," the, 461. 

Hispaniola, 175, 305, 457, 460. 

Hodge, William, 262, 291. 

Holker, John, 140, 205. 

"Holker," the, 391. 

Hollingsworth, Jesse, 442, 

"Honor," the, 368. 

Hopkins, Daniel, 208. 

Hopkins, Esek, 53-60, 91, 105, 116, 125, 133- 

139, 185, 419. 
Hopkins, J. B., 53, 54, 168. 
Hopkins, Stephen, 38, 39-40, 53, 81, 82, 86, 

90, 91, 92, 119. 
Hopkinson, Francis, 96-97. 
"Hornet," the brig, 428. 
"Hornet," the galley, 461. 
"Hornet," the sloop, 55, 56, 57. 
Hosmer, Titus, 203. 
Houston, John, 86. 
Howe, General WilHam, 77, 384. 
Howe, Lord Richard, 120. 
Howe, Tyringham, 59. 
"Hudson," the, 475. 
Huntington, Benjamin, 356, 359. 
Huntington, Daniel, 193. 
"Hussar," the, 353. 
"Hyder Ally," the, 394, 395. 

Impressment of seamen, 146. 
"Independence," the brigantine, 325, 352. 
"Independence," the galley, 442. 
"Independence," the sloop, 281. 
"Indian," the, 264, 304, 436. 
"Industry," the, 389. 
Ingraham, Edward, 453. 
loor, Joseph, 431. 
Ipswich, Mass., 322, 328. 



532 Index 

"Iris," the, 238. 
Isle of Pines, 431. 

"Jackall," the, 236. 

Jamaica, 156, 175, 345. 

"Jane," the, 407. 

"Jason," the, 169, 171. 

Jay, John, 185, 186, 211, 219, 261. 

Jefferson, Thomas, 303, 405, 409, 413. 

"Jefferson," the, 407, 411, 414. 

"Jemmy and Sallie," the, 430. 

Jenifer, Daniel of St. Thomas, 193, 221. 

Jersey, island of, 440. 

"John," the, 169. 

"John," the, 430. 

"Johnson," the, 442. 

Jones, John Paul, 54, 55, 106, 125, 164, 17-3- 
176, 179, 183, 207; in Europe, 258, 270- 
271, 273, 292-300, 303, 304, 449. 

Josiah, James, 120, 123. 

Joyner, John, 418, 435, 439, 459 

"Judith," the, 429. 

"Katy," the, 55, 464, 465. 

Kidd, Captain, commander of a British ves- 
sel, 450. 
Kingston, Mass., 325. 
"King Tammany," the, 452. 
Knox, Henry, 53. 

"Lady Washington," the, 71. 
Lafayette, 161, 295, 446. 
Lake Champlain, battle of, 77. 
Landais, Peter, 199, 258, 259, 294-300. 
Langdon, John, 37, 38, 91, 95, 106. 
Langdon, Timothy, 323. 
Laurens, Henry, 89, 311, 
Laurens, John, 437. 
"L'Aventure," 433. 
Lawrence, John, 387. 
Lebanon, Conn., 355. 
Ledyard, William, 371. 



i 



Index 533 

Lee, Arthur, 186, 211, 254, 280, 282, 300. 
Lee, R. H., 38, 83, 86, 89, 93, 186, 211, 215, 

256. 
Lee, William, 186, 211, 256. 
"Lee," the galley, 461. 
"Lee," the schooner, 63, 65. 
Leghorn, 277. 
Lempriere, Clement, 419. 

Lewis, Francis, 86, 90, 191-194, 196, 208, 475. 
"Lexington," the, 281, 287, 289, 291. 
"Liberty," the armed boat, 397, 415, 416, 417. 
"Liberty," the brig, 397, 407. 
Lilly, Thomas, 397. 
Little, George, 353. 
Liverpool, 206, 278. 
"Liverpool," the, 384, 
Livingston, Musco, 119, 
Livingston, William, 119, 477-478, 
Logic, Commander. 236. 
Long Island, 70, 368, 370, 474. 
L'Orient, 237, 256, 286, 299, 300. 302. 
Louis XVL, 202, 294, 436. 
Lovell, Solomon, 350. 
"Loyalist," the, 415, 416. 
LoyaUsts, 338, 348, 370, 448. 
Luxembourg, ChevaHer, 436, 439-440. 
Luzerne, French minister to tJnited States, 248. 
"Lydia," the, 389, 
"Lynch," the, 63, 64. 
Lyon, Samuel, 386, 

McClehany, William, 231. 

McDougall, Alexander, 213, 217-218, 224. 

McKean, Thomas, 222. 

Macpherson, John, 119. 

McQueen, John, 435. 

Machias, Maine, 320, 339. 

"Machias Liberty," the, 320. 

Madeira, 237. 

Madison, James, 192. 

"Magnifique," the, 247. 

Mahan, A. T., 78, 143, 



534 Index 

Manchac, 309. 

Manly, John, 64, 65, 123, 163, 236. 

Marblehead, Mass., 62, 63, 149. 

"Margaretta," the, 339. 

"Maria," the, 169. 

Marine Committee, appointment of, 80-87; 
offices of, 87; chairmen, 88-90; agents of, 
90-103, 105-115; work of, 105-140; condi- 
tions of the naval service under, 141-160; 
general movements of its fleet, 161-180; 
defects of, 181-186; superseded, 187; 69, 
70, 247, 279, 349. 

Marines, Continental, 43 and note, 51, 58, 117- 
118, 123, 129, 131, 136, 158-159, 197, 207, 
229-230; of Massachusetts, 326; of Con- 
necticut, 357, 358; of Pennsylvania, 376, 
377, 392; of Virginia, 397, 398, 410, 411; 
of South Carolina, 420, 422, 427, 430, 440; 
of Maryland, 441, 445, 447; of North Caro- 
Hna, 452. 

"Mars," the, 201, 273, 338, 343, 344. 

Martha's Vineyard, 339. 

Martin, Joshua, 457. 

Martinique, 204, 266, 305, 331, 353, 407, 443, 
457. 

Maryland commissioners for defense of Chesa- 
peake bay, 447. 

Maryland Committee of Safety, 441, 442. 

Maryland, Governor of, 443. 

Maryland Governor and Council, 441, 445, 
446, 447, 448. 

Maryland Legislature, 445, 447, 448, 451. 

Maryland Navy, 122, 315, 402, 415, 441-451. 

Maryland Provincial Convention, 441, 442, 
443, 444. 

Mason, George, 398. 

"Massachusetts," the, 325, 332, 343. 

Massachusetts Agent of the Commonwealth, 
337, 338. 

Massachusetts admiralty courts, 68, 69, 322- 
323, 327. 



Index 535 

Massachusetts Board of War, 329-332, 335, 
336, 337, 343, 345, 348, 351. 

Massachusetts Commissary-General, 338, 353. 

Massachusetts Committee of Foreign Affairs, 
343. 

Massachusetts Committee of Safety, 319. 

Massachusetts Constitution, 337. 

Massachusetts Council, 37, 319, 320, 322, 323, 
324, 341, 347, 351, 422. 

Massachusetts General Court, 319, 321, 323- 
326, 329, 332-336, 338, 339, 341. 

Massachusetts, Governor of, 337, 338, 353. 

Massachusetts House of Representatives, 319, 
321, 324, 347, 351. 

Massachusetts Navy, 151, 201, 275, 315-353, 
470; beginnings of, 318-328; documents re- 
specting, 328-329, 332-333; 334-337, 345- 
347; administration of, 329-332, 337-338; 
regulations respecting, 325-327, 333-335; 
vessels of, 325, 331, 335-339, 341-344, 352- 
353; expeditions of, 332-333, 341-353; end 
of, 353. 

Massachusetts Provincial Congress, 318, 319. 

Massachusetts trading vessels, 330-331. 

Matthews and Collier, raid of, 408. 

Mauritius, 179, 279. 

Maxwell, James, 401, 409, 413. 

"Medea," the, 352. 

"Mercury," the, 311. 

"Merlin," the, 385. 

Middletown, Conn., 355, 359. 

Mifflin, Samuel, 380. 

Mifflin, Thomas, 192. 

"Mifflin," the, 367. 

"Milford," the cartel-ship, 270. 

"Milford," the frigate, 344. 

Milligan, Captain, 461. 

Mill prison, 267, 268, 270. 

"Minerva," the merchantman, 475. 

"Minerva," the, of the Connecticut navy, 356, 
357. 358. 



536 Index 

Mississippi, the, 175, 307-311, 430. 
Mobile, expedition against, 166, 311. 
"Molly," the, 122. 
"Montague," the, 120, 165. 
Montgomery, General, 458. 
Montgomery, James, 390. 
"Montgomery," the frigate, 92. 
"Montgomery," the ship, 71, 472-475. 
"Montgomery," the sloop, 376, 379, 380, 385, 

386. 
Moore, Lieutenant, 339. 
Moravian mission, 274. 
Morgan, Captain, 430 
Morris, Gouverneur, 211, 214. 
Morris, Robert, 86, 90, 173-176, 182 and note, 

211; agent of marine, 218-251, 256, 257. 

302, 394; and the Pennsylvania navy, 376, 

378, 394. 
Morris, Thomas, 256. 
"Morris," the, 308-309. 
"Mosquito," the, 407. 
Moylan, Stephen, 62, 63. 
Mud Island, 384. 

'Nancy," the, 65, 236. 

Nantes, 256, 262, 266, 284, 286, 331, 369. 

Nantucket, 279, 328, 342, 465. 

Nassau, New Providence, 58, 173, 419. 
'Nautilus," the, 350. 

Naval administration in the states, in general, 
315-318. 

Naval Agents, of Washington, 62-63, 69-70; 
of Congress, 90-96, 103, 105-107, 110, 116, 
117, 150, 189, 195, 196, 221, 227, 247, 256- 
257, 263-264, 266, 303-311; of Massachus- 
etts, 327, 329; of Connecticut, 361-363; of 
Virginia, 401; of South Carolina, 426; of 
Maryland, 442-443; of North Carolina, 458- 
459. 

Naval Committee, appointment of, 35-39; 
quarters of, 39; description of, 39-40; act- 
ive life of, 40-41; legislative work, 42-51; 



Index 537 

prepares a fleet, 51-56; appoints officers, 
52-55; orders of, 56; summary of work, 60; 
its successor, 87; settling of its accounts, 
246-247. 

Naval Office at Paris, origin of, 252-253; duties 
and work, 253-254, 257-304; personnel of, 
254-255; headquarters of, 255; agents of, 
256-257; movements of the fleet under, 
286-300. 

Naval operations, 161-180. 

Naval stations, Continental, 154-155; British, 
155-156. 

Navy Board at Boston, origin of, 97-103; du- 
ties of, 105-116, 164-165; abolition of, 221, 
223, 227; 145, 168, 171, 176, 178, 182, 189, 
191, 195, 196, 197, 247,_ 349, 469. 

Navy Board at Philadelphia, origin of, 96-97, 
99-103; duties of, 105-116; abolition of, 221, 
223, 227; 145, 189, 195, 196, 197, 247. 

Navy of the American Revolution. See Con- 
tinental Navy, Massachusetts Navy, Con- 
necticut Navy, etc. 

Nesbit, J. M., 95. 

Neutral rights, 200, 253, 266, 271-274, 281- 
292. 

New Bedford, Mass., 339. 

Newbern, N. C, 93, 452, 453, 455, 457, 459. 

Newburyport, Mass., 62, 91, 320, 328, 336. 

Newfoundland, 164, 167, 169; Grand Banks of, 
166, 170, 236; fisheries of, 180, 276, 291- 
292. 

New Hampshire Navy, 315, 349, 476-477. 

New Haven, Conn., 73, 355, 360, 362. 

New Jersey, 315, 477-478. 

New Jersey Provincial Congress, 477. 

Nev/ London, Conn., 92, 93, 95, 116, 165, 196, 
236, 355, 357, 359, 362, 363, 371. 

New Orleans, 160, 307-309. 

New Providence Expedition, 55-60, 133. 

New York, city of, 52, 69, 70, 75, 93, 154, 155, 
206, 207, 239, 247, 364, 368, 471, 473. 



538 Index 



Newport, R. L, 99, 194, 371. 

New York Committee of Safety, 70, 472, 474, 

475. 
New York Convention, 96. 
New York, Governor of, 476. 
New York Marine Committee, 471, 472. 
New York Navy, 70-71, 315, 471-476. 
New York Provincial Congress, 71, 72, 471, 

472. 
New York Secret Committee, 475. 
Nichols, Samuel, 58, 123. 
Nicholson, James, 123, 124, 125 note, 206, 

238-239, 441, 444, 446, 449. 
Nicholson, Samuel, 236, 258, 262, 263. 
Niles, Robert, 357, 370. 
Niles, Samuel, 356, 357. 
Nixon, John, 52, 95, 96, 97, 376, 378. 
"Noble," the, 407. 
"North," the, 350. 

North CaroHna Council of Safety, 451, 452. 
North Carolina Naval Commissioners, 451-454. 
North CaroHna Navy, 315, 451-459. 
North CaroHna Provincial Congress, 452, 456. 
North Yarmouth, Maine, 322. 
Norwich, Conn., 92, 355, 356, 359, 360, 372. 
"Notre Dame," the, 428-431, 433, 434, 435. 

O'Brian, Jeremiah, 320. 

Ocracoke Inlet, 155, 400, 406, 452, 454-459. 

Officers, in Continental navy, 45-46, 50, 109, 
123; in Massachusetts navy, 333; in Con- 
necticut navy, 357; in Pennsylvania navy, 
374; in Virginia navy, 397, 401; in North 
Carolina navy, 452; in Rhode Island navy, 
464. 

"Oliver Cromwell," the, of the Connecticut 
navy, 359, 368-370. 

"Oliver Cromwell," the, of the Virginia navy, 
415. 

Olney, Joseph, 168. 

Olnev, Richard, 471. 

"Orpheus," the, 208. 



Index 539 



Osbornes, Va., engagement at, 414. 
Ossabaw Island, 461. 
"Otter," the, 350, 449. 
"Oxford," the, 265. 

Paca, William, 203, 447. 

Paine, R. T., 82. 

Palfrey, William, 302. 

"Pallas," the, 296. 

Palmer, Joseph, 324. 

Parsons, Alston and Company, 305. 

"Patriot," the armed boat, 397. 

"Patriot," the schooner, 416. 

Pay, in Continental navy, 46, 50-51, 128, 145- 
146, 198; in Massachusetts navy, 325-326, 
333; in Connecticut navy, 357, 361, 366- 
367; in Pennsylvania navy, 380-381; in 
Virginia navy, 397, 403, 411, 416; in South 
Carolina navy, 422, 432; in Maryland navy, 
441, 443, 445; in North Carolina navy, 452. 

"Peggy," the, 423. 

Pendleton, Captain, 459. 

Pennell, Joseph, 227, 246, 247, 250. 

Pennsylvania commissioners for defense of the 
Delaware, 393-395. 

Pennsylvania Committee of Safety, 373-381, 391. 

Pennsylvania Council of Safety, 378-381. 

Pennsylvania Convention, 378. 

Pennsylvania General Assembly, 389, 391-394. 

Pennsylvania Navy, 123, 315, 373-395; begin- 
nings of, 373-380; rules and regulations, 
375; commodores, 378-379; pay, 380-381; 
navy board, 381-383; in 1777 and 1778, 
383-389; in 1779, 390-391; prize courts, 
391-392; in 1782, 393-395. 

Pennsylvania Navy Board, 377, 381-383, 385, 
387-389. 

Pennsylvania Provincial Conference of Com- 
mittees, 379. 

Pennsylvania Supreme Executive Council. 378, 
382, 383, 387-392, 394, 395. 



540 Index 

"Pennsylvania Farmer," the, 452-454. 

Penobscot Expedition, 337, 347-352, 476. 

Pensacola, 175, 308, 311. 

Pensions, 46, 129-131, 366, 381, 392, 410, 447. 

Philadelphia, 39, 73, 92, 93, 94, 99, 102, 115, 
140, 154, 166, 171, 196, 235, 238, 247, 311, 
360, 373, 383, 384, 385, 389, 393, 413, 437- 
440, 465. 

"Phoenix," the, 408. 

Pickering, Timothy, 323. 

Pickles, WilHam, 309-311. 

Piercv, Thomas, 297. 

"Pigot," the, 469, 470. 

Pinckney, Colonel, 423. 

"Plater," the, 442. 

Plymouth, Mass., 63, 64, 98, 322. 

"Polacre," the, 433. 

Pollock, Oliver, 160, 307-310. 

"Polly," the, 430, 431. 

Pontchartrain, Lake, 309, 310. 

Porto Rico, 237. 

Portsmouth, N. H., 64, 91, 93 106, 111, 116, 
122, 169, 196, 204, 476. 

Portsmouth, Va., 400. 

Portuguese government, 273. 

Poughkeepsie, N. Y., 92, 96, 166. 

Pray, Captain, 460. 

President of the Continental Congress, 89, 118, 
188, 257, 301. 

Prince Edward Island, 66. 

"Prince Frederick," the, 169. 

"Prince of Wales," the, 430. 

Prisons, naval, 150-151, 267. 

Prisoners, naval, 151, 188, 209, 222, 227, 245, 
261, 267-272, 281, 341. 

Privateers and Privateering, Continental, 49- 
50, 112, 119, 127-128, 136, 146-148, 201, 
306, 308; in Europe, 260-261, 281; EngHsh, 
151, 164, 165, 345-347, 411, 429, 445, 446, 
449-451; Massachusetts, 148-149, 320-323, 
327, 339-341, 344-347, 349; Connecticut, 



Index 541 

148, 364-365; Pennsylvania, 148, 382, 390, 
392-393; Virginia, 148, 405; South Caro- 
Hna, 427, 428, 429; Maryland, 148, 443, 
444; North CaroHna, 459; Rhode Island, 
146, 148, 467-468; New York, 475; New 
Hampshire, 476, 

Prize Agents, Continental, 93-95, 103, 110, 
195-196, 226-227, 247, 303-304; of Massa- 
chusetts navy, 327; of Connecticut navy, 
363; of New York navy, 474. 

Prizes of Continental navy, 59, 163-164, 165, 
168-169, 172-173, 177-178, 206, 236, 237, 
267, 273, 281-288, 293, 296-297, 308, 311; of 
Washington's fleet, 62, 64-71; of Massa- 
chusetts navy, 332-333, 335, 343-347, 
353; of Connecticut navy, 357, 361, 368- 
369; of Pennsylvania navy, 385, 391, 394; 
of Virginia navy, 407; of South Carolina 
navy, 418-419, 429-430, 431, 438-439; of 
Maryland navy, 449; of Georgia navy, 461; 
of Rhode Island navy, 464; of New York 
navy, 474. 

Prizes, sharing of, in Continental navy, 43, 
46, 49-50, 51, 127, 129-130, 232-234; in 
Washington's fleet, 62; in Massachusetts 
navy, 326, 333; in Connecticut navy, 361, 
366; in Pennsylvania navv, 381; in South 
Carolina navy, 427-428, 436, 439-440; in 
Maryland navy, 443, 448; in Rhode Island 
navy, 468; in New York navy, 473. 

Pritchard, Paul, 427. 

Promotions in the Continental navy, 123-125. 

"Prosper," the, 421. 

"Protector," the barge, 450. 

"Protector," the ship, of the Massachusetts 
navy, 201, 336, 344, 345, 353. 

"Protector," the ship, of the Virginia navy, 406. 

Providence, R. I., 91, 93, 95, 98, 113, 135, 
136, 148, 360, 468. 

"Providence," the frigate, 91, 172, 204, 207, 
292, 433, 468. 



542 Index 

"Providence," the sloop, 55, 57, 59, 173, 175, 

349, 465. 
Prussian government, 177.. 
"Putnam," the, 377, 385. 

"Queen of France," the, 169, 171, 172, 204, 

207, 263, 433. 
Quincy, Joseph, 32. 

"Raisonnable," the, 350. 

"Raleigh," the brig, 408. 

"Raleigh," the frigate, 91, 281. 

Randall, Thomas, 472. 

Randolph, Peyton, 82, 119. 

"Randolph," the, 92, 430. 

"Ranger," the galley, 387. 

"Ranger," the ship, 106, 168, 169, 171, 172, 
292-293 433 434 

Rank, naval, 123-126, 197, 257-258, 422. 

Rathburn, John P., 172. 

Rations in Continental navy, 128-129; in Massa- 
chusetts navy, 333 ; in Maryland navy, 
447. 

"Rattlesnake," the, 426. 

Read, George, 86. 

Read, James, 101, 196, 226, 250. 

Read, Thomas, 123, 374, 376, 378. 

"Rebecca," the, a merchantman, 308. 

"Rebecca," the sloop, 461. 

Recaptures, 50, 232, 322-323. 

Red Bank, 373, 384. 

Reed, Joseph, 391. 

"Renown," the, 414. 

"Reprisal," the, a privateer, 308. 

"Reprisal," the sloop, 262, 269, 281, 283, 284, 
286, 287, 291. 

"Republic," the, 325, 331. 

"Resistance," the, 165. 

"Resolution," the, 442. 

"Revenge," the brig, 345. 

"Revenge," the cutter, 262, 281, 290, 291. 

Revere, Paul, 350. 



Index 543 

Rhode Island Committee of Safety, 463, 464, 
466, 467. 

Rhode Island Council of War, 138-139, 467, 
468, 469. 

Rhode Island General Assembly, 80, 463-470. 

Rhode Island, Governor of, 465-467. 

Rhode Island Inferior Court of Common Pleas, 
138. 

Rhode Island instructions to the Continental 
Congress, 33, 80-85. 

Rhode Island Navy, 80, 315, 463-471. 

"Richmond," the, 416. 

Richmond, Va., 401, 414, 447. 

"Rising Empire," the, 325, 338. 

Roach, John, 106, 107. 

Robertson, William, 435. 

Rodgers, Wilham, 472, 473. 

"Roebuck," the, 208, 352, 384. 

Rogers, Josias, 394. 

"Rose," the, 80, 463, 464. 

Ross, EHzabeth, 377. 

Ross, John, 256. 

"Rover," the, 470, 471. 

"Royal Charlotte," the, 430. 

Rules and Regulations, of Continental navy, 
43-48, 109, 110, 202-203, 231; of British 
navy, 47-48, 202; of Massachusetts navy, 
333-335; of Connecticut navy, 361, 366; 
of Pennsylvania navy, 374, 375, 391; of 
South Carolina navy, 422; of Maryland 
navy, 447; of New York navy, 472. 

Rush, Benjamin, 374. 

Russian navy, 304. 

Rutledge, Edward, 36. 

Rutledge, John, 82, 119, 424, 429, 430. 

St. Augustine, Fla., 156, 419, 429, 430 

St. Christopher, island of, 175. 

St. Eustatius, island of, 237, 305, 306, 331, 

457. 
St. Mary's Isle, 293. 
St. Thomas, island of, 335. 



544 Index 

Salem, Mass., 62, 149, 320, 328. 

Salisbury, Mass., 91, 325. 

"Sally," the, 389. 

Salter, Titus, 476. 

Saltonstall, Dudley, 54, 57, 133, 350, 352. 

Saltonstall, Gilbert, 206. 

Saltonstall, Gurdon, 154. 

Salvage, 50, 201, 232, 323. 

Samson, Simeon, 343. 

Sandy Hook, 370, 390, 474. 

"Saratoga," the, 122, 204, 208. 

Sartine, French minister of marine, 274, 278, 

296. 
Savage, P. H., 330. 
Savannah, 156, 167, 418, 459. 
Saybrook, Conn., 74, 359. 
Schuyler, General, 71-74, 116, 213. 
"Schuyler," the, 367. 
Schweighauser, a commercial agent in France, 

256. 
Seal of the Naval Department, 199, 209, 222. 
Seamen in Continental navy, difficulties of en- 

Hstment, 144-147; numbers, 158-159. 
Searle, James, 101. 
Sears, Isaac, 358. 

Secretary of Congress, 140, 209, 222. 
Secretary of Foreign Affairs, 214, 255. 
Secretarv of Marine, 208-209, 214-218, 221, 

224, 229. 
Secretary of War, 216. 
Secret Committee of Congrfess, 162. 
Selkirk, Earl of, 293. ) 

Selman, John, 63, 66. 
"Serapis," the, 163, 164, 296, 297. 
Seymour, Stephen, 426. 
Seymour, Thomas, 380. 
"Shark," the, 360, 369. 
Shaw, Jr., Nathaniel, 95, 355, 362-363. 
Sheridan, Patrick, 231. 
Sherman, Roger, 221, 355. 
"Sibylle," the, 237. 



^^'^^-t' 545 

Simpson, Thomas, 168, 172. 

Skimmer, John, 120, 165. 

Smith, James, 72, 471, 472. 

Smith, Meriwether, 220, 221. 

Smith, WilHam, 101. 

"Somerset," the, 448. 

"South Carolina," the, 436-440. 

South Carohna Council of Safety, 418-421. 

South Carohna, Governor of, 432, 434. 

South Carohna House of Representatives, 432, 
434. 

South Carolina Legislature, 423-428. 

South Carohna Navy, 173, 275, 315, 418-440; 
beginnings of, 418-424; operations of, 418- 
421, 428-434, 437-440; navy board, 424- 
428; ordinances of 1777 and 1778, 427- 
428; privateers, 428-429; Gillon and the 
"South Carolina," 435-440. 

South Carohna Navy Board, 424-428. 

South Carohna, President of, 423-425, 427, 
429, 430. 

South Carolina Privy Council, 423, 425, 430. 

South Carohna Provincial Congress, 420-422. 

South Quay, Va., 400, 406, 455, 456. 

Spanish-American War, 179. 

Spanish fleet, 166, 173, 242. 

Spanish government, 219, 273, 282, 308. 

"Speedwell," the, 389. 

"Spitfire," the, 466. 

"Spy," the, 356, 357, 368, 370. 

State Navies, 152-153, 160; in general, 315- 
318; in particular, 318-478. See Massa- 
chusetts navy, Connecticut navy, etc. 

Stonington, Conn., 357. 

Stormont, Lord, 269-270, 284-289. 

Stranger, Captain, 345. 

Submarine invention, 363-364. 

Subsistence money, 128, 198. 

Suffolk, Va., 455-456. 

Sullivan, Captain, 430. 

Sulhvan, General, 469, 470. 



546 Index 



Sullivan, James, 321, 323. 

Superintendant of Finance, 216, 219, 224, 

227. 
"Surprise," the, 262, 281, 287 
Swanzey, Mass., 325. 
Swedish Court, 273. 
"Sylph," the, 309. 

Talbot, Silas, 469-470. 
"Tamar," the, 419-420. 
"Tartar," the, of the Massachusetts navv, 339, 

353. 
"Tartar," the, of the Virginia navy, 400. 
Taylor, Richard, 397, 407. 
"Tempest," the, 406-407, 411, 414 
Ternay, Chevalier de, 207. 
"Terrible," the, 448. 

Texel, the, Holland, 204, 271, 297-298, 437. 
"Thetis," the, 407, 411. 
Thompson, Thomas, 133. 
Tilghman, Walter, 447. 
Tilhnghast, Daniel, 95. 
Tories, 338, 348, 370, 448 
Travis, Edward, 397. 
"Trepassey," the, 206. 
"Trimmer," the, 393. 
"Truite," the, 433, 434. 
Trumbull, Jonathan, 92, 95, 354, 355. 
"Trumbull," the, 92, 113, 204, 206, 220, 235, 

238-239. 
Tucker, Samuel, 292. 
Tufts, Simon, 420-421. 
Turner, George, 227. 
Turpin, Joseph, 421. 
"Tyrannicide," the, 325, 328, 342, 343, 345, 

349, 352. 

Uniforms, of Continental navy, 117-118; of 
Massachusetts navy, 327; of Pennsyl- 
vania marines, 377; of Maryland marines, 
441. 



Index 547 

Varnum, J. M., 223. 

Vergennes, French minister, 261, 284, 285, 
289 291 

Vernon, William, 98-99, 113, 182. 

"Victory," the, 87. 

"Virginia," the frigate, 93, 124. 

"Virginia," the ship, of the Royal navy, 350. 

"Virginia," the ship, of the Virginia navy, 407. 

Virginia Board of Trade, 409. 

Virginia Board of War, 409. 

Virginia commissioners for defence of Chesa- 
peake bay, 415-416. 

Virginia Commissioner of Navy, 409, 415. 

Virginia Committee of Safety, 396-398. 

Virginia General Assembly, 401-404, 408-411, 
415. 

Virginia Governor and Council, 399, 401, 403, 
411. 

Virginia Naval Commissioner, 409. 

Virginia naval magazines, 401. 

Virginia Navy, 152, 315, 396-417,429,446-447, 
449, 450, 456-458; beginnings of, 396-403; 
navy board, 398-403; admiralty courts, 
403-405; vessels, 397-398, 405-408, 414- 
417; raids, 408, 413-415; later legislation, 
408-413, 415-416; end of navy, 416-417. 

Virginia Navy Board, 398-403, 405, 408, 409, 
424. 

Virginia navy-yards, 400, 408, 414. 

Virginia Provincial Convention, 396, 398, 403. 

'Wallace, James, 463. 
Ward, Artemas, 69, 351. 
Ward, Samuel, 81, 83. 
Waring, Thomas, 190-191. 
Warner, Seth, 74. 
Warren, James, 51, 98, 112, 330. 
"Warren," the frigate, 92, 119, 136, 168, 171, 

349, 468. 
"Warren," the schooner, 63. 
Warwick, Va., 401, 414. 



548 Index 

Washington, George, 33, 37, 42, 48, 73, 116, 

154, 166, 167, 204, 211, 362, 388, 422, 446, 

468, 473 ; fleets of, 61-71 ; on failure of navy, 

184-186; on committees of Congress, 213. 
"Washington," the, of the Continental navy 

(frigate), 92, 388. 
"Washington," the, of the Continental navy 

(ship), 235, 248-249, 393-396. 
"Washington," the, of the Georgia navy, 460- 

461. 
"Washington," the, of the North Carolina 

navy, 452-454. 
"Washington," the, of the Rhode Island 

navy (galley), 466. 
"Washington," the, of the Rhode Island 

navy (sloop), 464, 465. 
"Washington," the, of the Virginia navy, 406, 

456. 
"Washington," the, of Washington's fleet, 63, 

65. 
"Wasp," the, 55, 57, 158. 
Waterford, Conn., 370. 
Waterbury, David, 77, 358. 
"Watt," the, 206-207. 
Weaver, Lieutenant, 58. 
Webb, WilHam, 377. 
"West Florida," the, 310-311. 
West Indies, the, 80, 151, 161, 165, 167, 169, 

173, 175, 179, 207, 236, 237, 242, 283, 305- 

307, 335, 342, 358, 368-369, 406, 424, 429, 

430, 449, 452. 
Wethersfield, Conn., 355, 356. 
"Weymouth," the, 368. 
Whaley, Commodore, 450- 
Whaling fleets, 151, 170, 268, 278-279. 
Wharton, John, 96, 97, 101, 196, 374, 387. 
Whipple, Abraham, 54-55, 57, 80, 133, 172, 

433, 464-465. 
Whipple, WilHam, 89, 90, 105-106, 190, 211. 
White, Robert, 373. 
"Whiting," the, 360, 369. 



i 



Index 549 

Whiting, Thomas, 260. 

Wickes, Lambert, 173, 179, 262. 269. 287-291. 

Williams, Jonathan, 256. 

Williams, J. F., 345. 

Williamsburg, Va., 93, 398. 

Willing, Captain, 308. 

Wilson, Willis, 458. 

Wilmington, N. C, 93, 434. 

Winder, William, 101, 196. 

"Winthrop," the, 339, 353. 

"Wolodimer," the, 304. 

Woodford, Thomas, 193. 

Wynkoop, Jacobus, 72, 74. 

Wythe, George, 203. 

"Yarmouth," the, 431. 
"York," the, 416. 
Yorktown, siege of, 415, 446 
Young, John, 208. 

ZUBLY, John J., 82. 



31^77-1 



